Chapel Hill still Chief-less

Wow, this is huge news. Let's all focus on his health issues. Anyone have any dirt on him??

It's unfortunate but at least it opens up the possibility of finding a better candidate:

An advantage of opening up the search again would be that good candidates who weren't available during the first hiring process might be available now, Stancil said. Also some who applied previously might not be available now, he said.

From today's HS (yeah, I'm linking to them - sorry about that).

Or re-evaluate our current staff and hire from within.

It's great that Roger wants to take his time and get it right. I want the Town to cast a wide net, go through a complete community vetting process rather than rush.

There is no need to rush into a decision to hire someone just to get the position filled because Curran is a competent and capable leader, Stancil said.

From what I've seen, Major Curran is doing a more than adequate job.

Interesting news to return to after a couple of weeks abroad. (London yesterday is something that I will write about later.)

Will wqrote: "

Interesting news to return to after a couple of weeks abroad. (London yesterday is something that I will write about later.)

Will wrote: "

Interesting news to return to after a couple of weeks abroad. (London yesterday is something that I will write about later.)

Will wrote: "

Interesting news to return to after a couple of weeks abroad. (London yesterday is something that I will have to write about later!)

Will wrote about "finding a better candidate." As one who served on the the interview panel of the assessment center, I think we recommended the best of the four candidates we interviewed.

What skills would a better candidate have?

Fred, wasn't diminishing your or the selection panel or the selection itself, just pointing out we have an opportunity to select quite possibly an even better candidate. Do you disagree?

Ruby said "wish he wasn't a white male", maybe there's other criteria folks want to introduce in this new search.

From what I know of our department, we have some strength to pull on - could you give us some insight into the "hiring from within" option Fred? Maybe last time we didn't cast as wide of a net as we possibly could - any comments to that point?

However we go back through this process, I hope we give our community plenty of opportunities to weigh in on the hiring criteria (yes, let's ask folks again what they want) and then have a suitable public vetting process. Chapel Hill's residents expect our policing to have a bit more nuance than other communities. Further, we're facing some new challenges - gang growth, widening areas of coverage, the potential Downtown street folks outreach program, etc. that could maybe use a new perspective.

So, as you quoted (or tried to ;-) ), while disappointed that Roger's hire fell through, I'm excited that this "opens up the possibility of finding a better candidate".

1. We were not a selcting panel. We gave imput to the Mgr.
2. We interviewed the four candidates the manager selected as the finalist.
3. Our questions we based on the community concern/interests expressed at the various sessions.
4. "Better" as a goal just doesn't ring right with me in this sort of process. I've done several selections of this type an you work with what you have. What you have is the result of who applies and the vetting process by the manager.
5. I would never base my selection on race, sex, or other such criteria.
6. Maybe the answer is as written above: we say that we really want a lot from a candidate and Superman is already busy elsewhere!

(PS: As for my tech problem, the Treo is the blame! :-) We're still trying to get out of JFK)

I have a question about the medical exam for a police
chief. If someone can fail due to a BP higher than 140/90,
which is high but not extremely high, then
how can there be about 540 towns in NC with about 540
police chiefs who all are healthy? Is the exam only given
once at the start of the chief's tenure? Many of the chiefs
in rural areas earn little money and some seem to follow
the Jackie Gleason sheriff model.

Joe, as I understand it, the medical exam is a hiring requirement.

SUBCHAPTER 9B - STANDARDS FOR CRIMINAL JUSTICE EMPLOYMENT: EDUCATION: AND TRAINING
SECTION .0100 - MINIMUM STANDARDS FOR CRIMINAL JUSTICE EMPLOYMENT
12 NCAC 09B .0101 MINIMUM STANDARDS FOR CRIMINAL JUSTICE OFFICERS
Every criminal justice officer employed by an agency in North Carolina shall:
(1) be a citizen of the United States;
(2) be at least 20 years of age;
(3) be of good moral character pursuant to G.S. 17C-10 and as determined by a thorough background investigation;
(4) have been fingerprinted and a search made of local, state, and national files to disclose any criminal record;
(5) have been examined and certified by a licensed physician or surgeon to meet physical requirements necessary to properly fulfill the officer's particular responsibilities and shall have produced a negative result on a drug screen administered according to the following specifications: ...

Would it have been legal to ask each of the final candates to submit to a physical as part of the qualifying process, prior to announcing the decision? To ask all applicants to make a brief statement concerning their physical wellbeing as measured by the state standard?

Joe,

The information revealed is about hypertension, there may have been other parts of the physical exam he failed also. He may have chosen to make public the most benign part of the physical which he did not pass. He is under no obligation to share all his health issues with the public.

I agree with your statement about the other 540 chiefs, with the prevalence of hypertension there are certainly some who could not meet the below 140/90 criteria.