On Feb 27, the Select Board conducted an unexpectedly contentious mid-year evaluation of Hopkinton Chief of Police Joseph Bennett.
Select Board Chair Chair Muriel Kramer shocked everyone in attendance with the breadth and depth of her research into the chief’s performance problems, including his failure to hire a command staff, broken commitments to provide body-worn cameras for officers, an unimplemented drug testing policy for department employees, and insubordination.
>> RELATED: Kramer calls for Independent Investigation of Police Chief
“This is a lot of information to digest,” said board member Amy Ritterbusch.
“This is the first time I’m hearing this,” said board member Shahidul Mannan. “If you want to share the questions, we can reconvene to hear the chief’s response to that.”
Kramer responded to the group. “I am happy to revisit this,” she said. “Matters of performance are discussed and managed in public session. The matter of the action that we need to take in terms of the investigation is a separate matter.” Kramer was referring to an internal investigation seeking to understand how former deputy police chief Jay Porter’s alleged victim’s personal information was released by the department.
The board discussed timing with the Town Manager and themselves, and agreed to reconvene the mid-year review at their March 12 meeting.
They then asked Bennett to confirm that two weeks was enough time for him. “I’m gonna need to get the documents, bring them before my counsel, and get their response, so at least the twelfth,” he replied.
But on March 8, when the full agenda was circulated, there was no mention of a continuation of the chief’s mid-year review. Instead, the board will consider the permit for the Boston Marathon and hear about a safe firearm storage program from a local advocacy group, among other things.
For readers looking to dive deeper into this topic, last week Hopkinton residents Scott and Gayle Ober analyzed the self-assessment Chief Bennett submitted to the Select Board in advance of the February 27 meeting and provided a rebuttal and additional commentary.
“The chief’s submission is rife with smoke-and-mirrors and bereft of verifiable accomplishments. His self-review might as well be a bunch of blank pages,” wrote the Ober’s.
Then they need to release the revised date, when is it? The Select Board has to finish his review and it sounds like the law requires that it be done in public session. We only heard from one member during what was supposed to be his review. The other 4 are no doubt hoping to bury this issue or prolong it long enough that the DA investigation takes care of their little problem so they can avoid having to go on the record addressing the chief’s objectively dismal job performance, but that cannot be allowed. It needs to be done now. The board needs to be held accountable and held to the record and so does the chief. It is not possible for him to continue to serve now that the public knows all of this information. It’s past time for the SB to do their jobs.