SWAMPSCOTT — A controversial Town Meeting article asking Swampscott to remove its police and fire chiefs from the state’s “Civil Service” system has been put off until the next Town Meeting.
Massachusetts Civil Service is a system administered by the state’s Human Resources Division that handles the testing of job applicants and employees seeking promotion in towns that use the system. In Swampscott’s case, both the Police and Fire departments use “Civil Service.” If the chiefs of those departments were removed from Civil Service, Swampscott would no longer be bound by Civil Service rules, which restrict the town to either hiring chiefs from within its current police and fire ranks, or hiring sitting chiefs in other communities.
Proponents of the change point to the fact that the town would have a larger applicant pool — up to 75 applicants compared to just three or four — when hiring police and fire chiefs, while opponents of leaving Civil Service claim the system protects against nepotism because it is run by the state.
The article received support from both Police Chief Ron Madigan and Fire Chief Graham Archer, who both said the town would have more candidates to choose from without Civil Service when hiring its next chiefs. Neither chief has made an announcement about retirement, but Madigan is set to reach the state-mandated retirement age of 65 next year.
Nonetheless, the article was opposed by others, including the Swampscott Firefighters Union. Ultimately, Select Board Chairman Peter Spellios proposed an amendment to the article to allow a “study committee” to research the topic and give a presentation at a future Town Meeting. Spellios’ amendment passed, with 161 in favor and 72 opposed, effectively pushing the article off until the next Town Meeting, which will likely be in September.
Among those in favor of the article was Town Administrator Sean Fitzgerald, who praised the proposed move as allowing an “open and inclusive process” when hiring town police and fire chiefs. Fitzgerald said leaving Civil Service would not only broaden the pool of applicants for the chief positions, but would “eliminate potential bias” and make it easier for the town to hire chiefs who are racial minorities.
“Changing this system is the right thing to do,” Fitzgerald said.
Spellios said he still needed to learn more about Civil Service, but nonetheless was comfortable supporting the article. Even though he was the one who proposed the amendment delaying a true vote, he said leaving Civil Service will ultimately be best in future police and fire chief hirings.
“It goes beyond diversity, it is about making sure we have a pool of applicants that represent the best and brightest for Swampscott,” Spellios.
The study committee proposed by Spellios includes five voting members composed of one member jointly appointed by the police and fire unions, one member appointed by the Select Board, and three Town Meeting members appointed by the town moderator, who is currently Michael McClung.
The Swampscott Firefighters Union penned a letter to residents prior to Town Meeting detailing its opposition to leaving Civil Service for the town’s police and fire chiefs.
“We believe this is the first step in attempting to remove the entire departments from civil service,” the letter reads. “We want the town to be aware of this rushed vote and to be aware that this change is not welcomed by the Swampscott firefighters on the basis that it will cost the town more money, change the community-oriented culture, it will discourage and oppose veterans coming out of service looking for employment, and lead to potential nepotism.”
The union pointed out that the move away from Civil Service would mean the town would have to spend time and money on the hiring process — resources it does not have to spend under the state-run Civil Service system.
Both chiefs, Madigan and Archer, said leaving Civil Service does not mean internal candidates will not be considered as future chief hires.
