Selectmen reject Chelmsford police officer transfer
Published on December 23rd, 2002
STONEHAM, MA - A potential transfer of a police officer from Chelmsford, who is also a Stoneham resident and homeowner of Cricklewood Drive, to the Stoneham Police Department was soundly rejected by the Board of Selectmen by a 4-1 vote at last week’s meeting. The Civil Service approved transfer of Joe Crowley, an officer in Chelmsford for the last 13 months, to the Stoneham Department was recommended by both Stoneham Police Chief Gregory O’Keefe and Town Administrator Dave Berry.
Selectmen Bob Sweeney, Charlie Smith, Anthony Kennedy and Mary Pecoraro all voted to reject the transfer, and expressed their concern with going against the conventional Civil Service process. O’Keefe currently has a Civil Service list of police candidates and Crowley isn’t on the top tier of candidates. The quartet of Selectmen voiced their preference for rewarding the candidates who have patiently waited for a spot to open up.
“We have people on that list who are already involved in the town, and have worked hard to move up that list,” said Smith. “This gentlemen (Crowley) already has a job, and there are other candidates in town who have been waiting patiently.”
O’Keefe explained that he had Crowley in mind to replace the slot vacated by Stoneham High resource officer Ed Fucarile. According to O’Keefe, rejecting Crowley’s transfer could result in either Fucarile being removed from the high school, thereby endangering the $125,000 three year Federal Grant for the high school officer, or he would need an additional $60,000 in overtime money to compensate for the loss of Fucarile.
“This move makes perfect business sense for the town,” said O’Keefe. “We have an officer that Chelmsford paid to train and go through the academy, and we would be getting an experienced officer who wants to work in Stoneham.”
“He’s a Stoneham homeowner and he’s phoned me several times over the last year to express his interest in becoming a part of the Stoneham community,” added O’Keefe. “This is someone who’s already passed all the evaluation tests, and gone through all the hoops of becoming an officer. I thought this was a no-brainer.”
O’Keefe, in a phone interview after the meeting, stated that Fucarile was indeed pulled out of the high school at the end of last week, and that the grant may be in danger.
“With grants, you need to use it or they can take the money back at any time,” said O’Keefe. “It could be a situation where we want to put the officer back at the high school next year, and they tell us that the funds have dried up.”
The Selectmen took a hard line when O’Keefe informed them of the possible consequences of rejecting the transfer.
“If we lose the grant then we lost the grant,” said Pecoraro. “Maybe we should be deciding whether the need for an officer in the high school is greater than the need for officers on the street.”
“Some things are about more than dollars and cents,” said Sweeney. “It’s important to uphold the tried and true hiring process.”
The only differing opinion was that of Ciccarello, who voted against rejecting the transfer and didn’t want to shun a Stoneham resident.
“I’m not going to pit Stoneham resident against Stoneham resident,” said Ciccarello. “I don’t like to do that. I’m not going to vote against a resident of the town.”
A portion of the disagreement stemmed from a conversation that took place prior to the meeting. A meeting took place between O’Keefe, Ciccarello and Sweeney at the Unicorn Golf Course to discuss the transfer. There were conflicting reports as to whether the meeting took place over the summer, or 8-10 months ago, but according to O’Keefe, Sweeney and Ciccarello both said that the transfer would be “no problem.”
Sweeney admitted he discussed a possible transfer in general terms with both O’Keefe and Crowley himself, but was under the impression that the transfer was to take place when the department had several openings to fill.
“We had something like five openings when we discussed it, and I though he was a candidate for one of those spots,” said Sweeney. “I never heard about it again, and thought it was a dead issue before it just popped up in our packets last week.”
“For me it’s all about the established process that we have of hiring people,” said Sweeney. “This is the way we’ve always done it, and I don’t think now would be a good time to change precedents.”
“I think we’ve only a couple of transfers in the last twenty plus years, and both were lifelong Stoneham residents,” added Sweeney. “I don’t think we should start hand-picking people to transfer to Stoneham.”
Crowley was disappointed in the decision and the alleged reversal of opinion by Sweeney.
“What am I supposed to do now,” asked Crowley. “My name is mud in Chelmsford after asking my chief for a transfer.”
“I came home from the Selectmen meeting and my wife was in tears,” added Crowley. “All we wanted to do was become a greater part of our community where we’ve decided to raise a family, and I feel like the Selectmen ruined it for us. I don’t even feel like we’re wanted in Stoneham.”
Crowley was also upset that, as a taxpayer in the town, he wasn’t allowed to speak during the transfer discussion.
O’Keefe wouldn’t speculate on the reasons behind the rejection, but said that he would continue to run the department with fiscal responsibility.
“It wasn’t my decision to make,” said O’Keefe. “I’m sure they had their reasons for rejecting the transfer, but, in the end, they’ll have to answer to the taxpayers.”
“I came up with an option that would get us an experienced officer and Stoneham resident without paying to train him,” said O’Keefe, who added that the town has to pay salary and benefits during an officers six-month training period. “I felt like I came up with the best possible solution for my department, and I’ll continue to make the right decisions with my department.”
Subscribe and get Home Delivery of The Independent
Save 36% off the newstand price — that's like 18 FREE issues!