2025-12-19 Police Commission Regular Minutes

Home

Regular Session Minutes December 19, 2025 Page 6 interviewed in person, and the interview will serve as the final interview. Based on the in-person interviews of the candidates who accept, the Commission will select the Chief CommissionerLacerte seconded the motion. Discussion:Discussion followed regarding whether the interviews would be conducted in one day or over two meetings and related logistical considerations. Commissioner Tavares requested that counsel consult with Human Resources from a labor law perspective to ensure that the proposed process does not create any liability or provide an unintended advantage to any candidate and that the notification process is consistent and equitable for all candidates. Michelle Simmons expressed concern regarding whether informing candidates of their ranking was necessary, questioning whether the ranking would factor into the final selection orserve as a prerequisite to advance to the oral interview stage. She noted that if all candidates advance on a level playing field once interviews begin, providing rankings may be unnecessary. Commissioner Urban-Smith sought clarification on whether the intent was to invite the top eleven candidates for interviews and then select the Chief of Police from among those interviewed. Commissioner Yamada confirmed this understanding and raised concerns about whether one in-person interview per candidate would provide sufficient information to make such a significant leadership decision, suggesting consideration of additional steps in the process. Commissioner Tavares asked whether, upon candidates’ acceptance of the interview invitation, the Commission would be provided access to full application packets and resumes, as the process had remained anonymous to that point.Chair Robinson explained that in the previous selection process, Commissioners had access to application materials and interrogatory responses during interviews, and candidate identities were revealed after narrowing the pool. Commissioners discussed the role of background checks and other evaluative tools in the selection process. Ms. Simmons noted that the County Charter lists minimum requirements and does not specifically reference additional evaluations, deferring to counsel for guidance. DCCSalas-Ferguson advised that while minimum qualifications are established, the Commission has discretion over the selection process, including whether to incorporate background checks or other evaluative measures. Heclarified that interviews would occur during public meetings, allowing for public testimony on agenda items. Discussion also addressed anonymous written testimony. Chair Robinson expressed concern regarding anonymous submissions, while DCCSalas-Ferguson advised that