Sept 25, 2006 — Union representatives went head to head with public officials Monday on amendments that would allow security personnel with the governor's office to transfer benefits they accrued as peace officers.
At issue is whether officers moving from classified to unclassified positions get to retain their retirement and promotion benefits as police officers and accrue their service to the government. Officers in the executive security unit of the governor's office are considered unclassified; all other peace officers are considered classified. The committee on Public Safety, Homeland Security and Justice met to hear testimony on amendments to a bill addressing the issue.
Police Commissioner Elton Lewis called the amendments "long overdue." Union representatives, on the other hand, said they are not opposed to their fellow officers choosing executive positions, but said the decision should exclude them from benefits allotted to police officers in classified positions.
According to original Bill No. 26-0244, any officer selected for unclassified service "does not have his years of service while in the unclassified service counted, except for retirement purposes only."
At times, chief negotiator Karen Andrews and several representatives of the police unions clashed in a heated debate. Andrews insisted that opposition to the bill came from personal motivation of the union representatives present.
Andrews accused the representatives of trying to gain personal promotions in exchange for officials not opposing the bill. The St. Thomas Police Benevolent Association (PBA) vice chair, Det. Maria Peterson, called Andrews' accusations a "smoke screen" and said Andrews repeatedly denied union requests for discussions on particulars of the bill.
According to testimony by Law Enforcement Supervisors' Union (LESU) President Lt. Edmund Thompson, union contracts state "only active members of the LESU are entitled to participate in promotional examinations."
The amendments to the bill will give unclassified officers the opportunity to transfer their hours of service to the executive branch, granting them eligibility for promotional exams.
"Employees in government are either classified or unclassified," Peterson said. "These individuals are not a part of the infrastructure of the police department. Promotion of executive security officers took away promotions from members of the union."
Carlos Farchette, DPNR deputy chief of enforcement, said the bill "causes hardships" within the department because it would freeze positions, preventing their being filled for several years. He said his department currently has one officer in the executive security unit and "may have two" in the next administration.
Andrews called the bill "vital" and testified that the amendments do not violate any contractual agreement. Establishment of the unit saved the government thousands of dollars, Lewis testified. He also discussed the difficulty of officers accepting assignment to the unit seeing their loss of benefits and stagnation of their time of service — a perceived "financial detriment."
Officers "have lost and will continue to lose" if they are made to stay on the same course, Lewis testified. The proposed amendment, he said, will remedy the "detriment [by] allowing officers to retain their privileges of classified service."
Sen. Craig Barshinger called conduct at the meeting "a mess," accusing each side of arguing "so far from the core of the issue." He urged representatives to remember the importance of their positions and said the "mission to protect public safety was lost."
Barshinger encouraged the panel to address the "real barrier" they were fighting, asking if the lapse in service was akin to leaving the force for a period of time to pursue other avenues, then returning. Lewis said all executive security officers are indeed part of the police force, underlying his support for the bill.
Other officers who sever their ties with the department must undergo original application and academy training. The officers in question have not left the force, supporters insist; they have been reassigned and should be allowed to return to duty.
Daniel Matarangas King, VIPD legal advisor, asked Barshinger to note the unfairness of the original bill. He argued that the time executive officers gained during their service to the government was being quashed and the amendments to the bill created a fair bridge from unclassified to classified peace officer status.
The meeting, held in the St. Croix Legislature conference room, did not have a quorum. Committee Chair Pedro "Pete" Encarnacion allowed testimony to go on the record, but the bill will remain in committee until a quorum is met. Sen. Liston Davis was the only other committee member in attendance.
Back Talk
Share your reaction to this news with other Source readers. Please include headline, your name and city and state/country or island where you reside.
