Board of Selectmen Rescinds Its Proposal to Create a Lieutenant Position in Police Department

Wednesday night, the Board of Selectmen rescinded its earlier decision to add a lieutenant’s position in the Canton Police Department.

The change had been part of a proposal by Chief Christopher Arciero to restructure the department somewhat.

At its last meeting the board voted for the proposed change to rename the deputy chief to captain. It will include some new job responsibilities but is largely a change in name to reflect the structure of most area departments.

It also voted for a scenario that would upgrade one sergeant’s position to lieutenant and eventually trade another sergeant's job for an additional patrol officer. It did not change the overall number of sworn personnel.

Wednesday, selectmen said they had expected a vote from the union as to whether it would accept the lieutenant proposal.

Since the union has not voted, selectmen David Gilchrist said he felt that the structure of the department should be stable as the town begins its search for a captain, who will replace Deputy Chief Don Hull. Hull recently retired from Canton and took the chief’s job in Stowe, VT.

“The lack of a clear police department organization would put off many applicants,” Gilchrist said.

On Thursday morning, Chief Administrator Robert Skinner said the position of a lieutenant could conceivably come up again, especially in a year when the police department’s union contract will be up for renegotiation. 

The vote Wednesday will keep the department at a chief, captain, four sergeants, a detective and eight patrol officers. 

Selectmen voted 4 to 1 for the change Wednesday with Tom Sevigny voting against it. 

Police union president Sgt. Mark Penney said he has listened to the recording of the meeting and was surprised by the move and did not realize selectmen were looking at a timeframe. At the same time, however, he said he did not think the vote to create the lieutenant position would be done so quickly either and thought there would be more discussion to flesh out the idea. 

"Moving forward on what was presented would have created some problems, especially by eliminating a supervisor," Penney said. "I think the original vote to move the position forward may have been a bit premature so I am not completely saddened by last night’s vote to rescind it."

Penney added that he does feel it may be something that can be discussed at another time. 

"I was glad to hear Mr. Skinner talking positively about the position and I am optimistic about revisiting the idea in the future," Penney said.