Laserfiche WebLink
and present chief recommended retention of this language. In <br /> your Committee's view, this language is intended to discourage <br /> the police commission from interjecting itself in the internal <br /> administration of the department. It would be highly disruptive <br /> for the police commission to try to involve itself in promotions, <br /> transfers, the hiring of individual officers, the command <br /> structure, and other details of internal organization, for <br /> example. <br /> At the same time, your Committee believes that in addition <br /> to hiring the chief and investigating misconduct, the police <br /> commission can serve a general advisory role. This advisory role <br /> is implicit in the submittals of both the present police <br /> commission and the chief of police to the Charter Commission: <br /> both would give the police commission the power to review <br /> departmental rules and to comment on the budget. These powers <br /> have been incorporated into your Committee's draft, along with <br /> the power to advise the chief on police-community relations, <br /> which is a particularly useful and appropriate function for the <br /> police commission. <br /> 3 . Procedure for Removal of the Chief. The Charter <br /> Commission heard two different proposals for the removal of the <br /> chief. The police commission favored retention of the present <br /> system, which essentially allows the commission to remove the <br /> chief at will. The police commission proposed that the removal <br /> could be "without cause being stated" or "at its pleasure. " <br /> Present Charter language actually has this effect; the police <br /> 762 <br />