The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) released a report on Monday, December 9, covering the findings of the investigation into the Worcester Police Department (WPD) announced on November 15, 2022.
The over two-year long investigation determined that “DOJ has reasonable cause to believe that WPD and the City engage in a pattern or practice of conduct that deprives people of their rights under the Constitution and federal law.”
Find coverage of the finding of the DOJ report related to excessive force, or coverage of its findings related to sexual misconduct.
Upon the release of the report, both city and police union officials attacked the report. Some demanded the dates, times, and names of officers involved to be released, which the DOJ cannot do. The type of investigation, a pattern or practice investigation, seeks to determine if systemic problems exist within the department being investigated.
The DOJ conducted nearly 80 of these investigations prior to Worcester. I have seen no evidence to suggest the DOJ conducted its investigation in Worcester differently than any of the others.
While discussion criticizing the report has dominated the conversation, proposals for reform have been few.
Current Police Policy Proposals
During its meeting on December 17, the Worcester City Council voted unanimously to “commit to holding five (5) Special City Council Meetings to discuss and hear community input regarding the Department of Justice (DOJ)’s Investigation of the Worcester Police Department (WPD) and the City of Worcester.”
The city council met for the first time since that meeting on January 7.
On December 10, Worcester City Manager Eric Batista outlined some proposals in a statement in response to the DOJ report:
- Charge the new Executive Office of Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (EODEI) and WPD with a number of priority initiatives, including to work cooperatively with the Human Rights Commission on training and policy review;
- Establish a hotline for members of the public to report any alleged misconduct by police officers, managed by the Investigations Division within the EODEI, which will also examine all evidence and testimony independently and without bias;
- Assign the Training Division within the EODEI to lead trainings, seminars, and workshops relative to behavioral health, implicit bias, and additional topics, all of which will align with and inform written policy within the WPD;
- Prepare a report for City Council to review the structure of a Civilian Review Board, to be deliberated upon in concept through due public process.
Training, Hotline, and EODEI
Additional training is welcome
While a hotline for complaints is a start, that’s something that should have happened two years ago, at the latest, when the DOJ announced its investigation.
The ability and expertise for EODEI to conduct investigations into police matters is unclear. EODEI reports to, and is under the purview of, the city manager, which leaves the same absence of oversight of the police department.
Oversight in Government
Batista’s administration has claimed that oversight of the police department is the responsibility of the city manager.
Oversight in the American system of government comes from outside the organization. For example, in the federal government, the legislature, which includes both the House of Representatives and the Senate, is a co-equal branch of government alongside the administrative/executive and judicial branches. Part of its responsibilities are oversight of the administrative branch, which is led by the president.
The Worcester City Charter, the foundational document of city government, defines an administrative branch led by the city manager, and a legislature, the city council.
Civilian Oversight
The Worcester City Council has declined to seek information on or implement a civilian review board. The council heard a citizen petition on the topic on December 4, 2012. Council filed that item, meaning the council would take no further action on it.
On June 16, 2020, the Worcester City Council unanimously passed an order, after amendments, that said:
“Request City Manager request Police Chief provide City Council with a report relative to creating a Civilian Review Board/Commission with subpoena power to investigate allegations of law enforcement wrongdoing. Said report should include information relative to best practices used in other communities who have implemented such a Board/Commission.”
The report has yet to be provided to the city council. Councilor Khrystian King had an item on the council’s January 7 agenda that sought an update on this adopted order. The item was held and will be heard at the council’s next meeting.
A majority of the city council has stated opposition to a civilian review board in the past. Unless the perspective of members has changed, it is unclear the votes exist to create the board.
Policy Changes for Reform
While I appreciate that some proposals were made, they are inadequate bandaids, not bold proposals for reform.
There are options for such reform, but it remains unclear if the political will to implement them exists. The city charter would require amendment to implement some of the suggestions below.
If the city is serious about reform within its police department, it should consider the following.
Unilaterally Release All Gag Orders
Most settlements of lawsuits the city reaches with those who claim a WPD officer violated their rights include a non-disclosure agreement which prohibits the plaintiff and city from speaking publicly about their case. This is standard in many types of contracts, both in government and the private sector.
The city should unilaterally release all individuals subject to non-disclosure clauses in agreements which alleged violations of civil rights or police misconduct.
Before the settlement of litigation, the city declines to comment on pending litigation. When the plaintiff and the city settle, the agreement prohibits the city from comments.
Taxpayers fund these settlements. Taxpayers funding the city legally prohibiting itself from answering to its residents on the use of their funds is unacceptable.
The Augustus administration engaged in years-long litigation with the Worcester Telegram and Gazette to fight its legal requirements to make documents about police discipline public. The judge in her ruling against the city that it used bad faith arguments in the case.
The people of Worcester are not here to pay to prevent themselves from learning about what they’ve been forced to pay for.
More importantly, those who have endured these experiences should be free to talk about them if they so wish. We should want them to talk. We should want to learn about and try to understand their experiences. Doing so will inform decisions related to reform in the future.
Obviously, the city should also refuse to include non-disclosure provisions in any settlements in the future.
Concern for what information becomes public should have no priority. None. Residents and city officials need to talk about these issues. We should be listening to those who allege violation of their rights, if they are willing to talk, to understand the harm caused.
Silence and details hidden in the darkness will not solve these issues.
Disband the WPD Bureau of Professional Standards (BOPS)
The WPD BOPS Division conducts internal investigations into allegations of misconduct by police officers. Much like Batista’s proposal for EODEI to conduct investigations, BOPS is another form of the administration investigating itself. It is the police department investigating itself.
No part of government should be the sole authority to investigate complaints against its own personnel. Ever.
The WPD currently has fewer officers than its budget allows, leaving the department understaffed. Those currently assigned to BOPS could fill openings in other divisions, closing some gaps in staffing.
Most importantly, this enables the police department to focus on its core mission, public safety. It also enables the department to have a separation from investigations of its own officers, and the scrutiny that comes with it.
The DOJ’s report harshly criticized the BOPS division. It described investigations conducted to close cases, not to root out bad actors within the department.. BOPS investigations have often been controversial, and some if its investigations credibly called a sham.
Establish the Office of the Inspector General
The federal government, many state governments, including Massachusetts, and some cities use the role of an inspector general (IG) as an independent, internal investigator. An IG investigates claims of misconduct, corruption, policy effectiveness, policy compliance, and more.
The IG must have purview to launch investigations in response to citizen or employee complaints, and by its own initiative, across the entire administration, including the WPD.
The IG should lead a quasi-independent office which has access to all documents under the control of city government and the power to subpoena evidence.
Most importantly, it must have the power to require any city employee or contractor to provide testimony and other evidence. Absent a valid claim under the Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which protects an individual from being compelled to provide self-incriminating information, a failure to comply with IG investigations must lead to automatic employment termination.
The city council should have the power to appoint the IG, not the city manager or his administration. There must be clear protections for the IG and their staff against termination without cause to fortify its independence.
The person to lead such a department should have investigations experience and a background in law. No person previously employed by the city government should be eligible for an appointment to the department to avoid conflicts of interest because of personal relationships.
Remove Worcester Police from Mass. Civil Service
The Massachusetts Civil Service system is, in part, a standardized testing system that carries enormous weight on the eligibility of an individual for hiring by police departments. Civil service test scores affect both hiring and promotions.
Municipalities can opt-out from the program.
In a report published in September 2024, the Worcester Regional Research Bureau found that of 345 municipal law enforcement agencies in the state, 107 participate in civil service. Just 44 of those departments have full participation in civil service.
Worcester was one of those municipalities until recently, when the city removed the chief of police and the deputy chiefs from civil service. However, all other WPD personnel are in the civil service system.
No bubble test can determine if an individual will be a good cop or will treat members of the public appropriately. An individual that scores well on a bubble test, but treats everyone they encounter like garbage or isn’t capable of making quality decisions in high stakes scenarios, will make the department worse.
Rebuild the Termination Process
For years, the city has heavily used so-called last chance agreements as part of its discipline process. In these agreements, an officer contractually agrees to termination if found responsible for another policy violation over the next decade.
Often, the incident that led to the discipline process and last chance agreement should have been cause for termination, but the process is long, expensive, and often leads to litigation.
For example, in 2008, Sgt. Kevin Pageau and Detective John Doherty conducted a coercive interrogation of over two hours. A 16-year-old teen whose child died in his crib just days earlier eventually confessed to killing her child after being lied to and unlawfully assured she’d be tried as a juvenile (which police do not determine, the district attorney makes that decision) and being subjected to several other coercive tactics. The child was not murdered by anyone, and certainly not his mother.
Then-Chief of Police Gary Gemme, after criticizing the judge that dismissed the case against the teen on Twitter, promoted Pageau to the BOPS.
The city settled the resulting lawsuit for $2.1 million.
In 2022, a civil jury found that Doherty acted as a co-conspirator to conceal and fabricate evidence in the investigation of Natale Cosenza. The jury awarded him $8 million. The court removed the city from the case, leaving Doherty and Sgt. Kerry Hazelhurst liable for the award to Cosenza.
Cosenza spent 16 years in prison in the case before his conviction was vacated.
At the time of publication, Cosenza has yet to collect a single dollar of his settlement as the two defendants do not have $8 million.
Both Pageau and Doherty have retired and will collect a pension for the rest of their lives that should to good cops that retire. Hazelhurst remains part of the Worcester Police Department.
The city must be able to fire officers that department leadership does not trust to be on the street. Being a Worcester Police officer should never be a near automatic ticket to a job for life.
The barriers to termination are the result, in part, of many years of city leadership surrendering to the will of the police unions. That’s not the fault of the unions. They act on behalf of their members, as they should. They’ve done a fantastic job, as it nearly takes an act of God to fire one of them. They will oppose these changes strongly.
It will take political courage, strong leadership and the strength to tell the unions that the days of protecting bad cops in Worcester are over.
Reform Police Private Details
Police details are off-duty assignments that can include directing traffic at road construction sites to presence at businesses or events with high attendance, and others.
In 2023, a dozen law enforcement officers within the Worcester Police Department earned over $100,000 in detail pay, on top of their salary. At least a dozen earned more than their base salary through details. The officer with the highest detail assignment total earned $126,570 on top of regular pay of $99,452.
It is difficult to determine the exact number of additional hours officers worked to earn those detail pay totals. The rate for each rank is different and assignments with longer duration require overtime pay.
However, many officers are working their regular work hours and many, many additional hours at detail assignments. Several work around 60 hours per week, while some working up to 80 hours per week.
This is insane.
Police work is not easy. Officers see people, whether self-imposed or imposed upon them, at extremely low points,. They respond to scenes of violence, and are frequently in high-stress situations and scenarios that can quickly turn violent. Officers endure significant trauma, which can have extreme effects on behavior.
Working long hours leads to fatigue, which can cause irritability, reduced reaction time, poorer decision making, and more. These are not traits we want to encourage for police officers in the city.
The city should emphasize ensuring officers have ample time off for recreation, family, caring for both their physical and mental health, and other leisure.
The city should investigate alternative personnel to carry out detail assignments, like flaggers for road construction sites. Some detail assignments will continue to require a police officer, but alternative personnel could cover many of these assignments.
This change will reduce the labor costs of servicing several detail assignments. Over the first years of this new system, the cost savings realized should apply to increasing regular pay for Worcester officers to mitigate the reduction of income officers will experience with fewer detail assignments available.
While the opportunity for officers to earn total compensation of $250,000 or more would likely end, ensuring officers earn a fair wage aligned with the responsibilities of their positions and the risks involved is critical to recruiting, retention, and morale
