Susanville City Administrator Jared Hancock released a statement Friday concerning claims made about the city’s hiring practices and the January 20th hiring of John King as the city’s Chief of Police. The release is partially in response to a March 21st news story published in the Lassen County Times newspaper that cited, “Allegations of forgery, questionable qualifications and lack of transparency… regarding the process the Susanville City Council used when it hired John King as its new Chief of Police.”
“The City of Susanville wishes to thank the community for their continued support of our law enforcement officers, Police Department, Chief of Police and the City of Susanville,” said Hancock in the press release dated March 31st. “In response to false reports and allegations intended to call into question the recruitment and qualifications of the City’s Police Chief, it has become necessary to dispel the rumors and to reaffirm that the community was, and continues to be, well served and protected by our law enforcement professionals.”
“The City’s recruitment and selection was consistent with past recruitments, city codes and state statutes. The City is pleased with the chief’s qualifications, training and experience and the decision it made to hire the new Police Chief. No reconsideration is pending. The State of California and the California Commission of the Peace Officer Standards and Training (POST) have adopted minimum standards for an individual to serve in the capacity of a Chief of Police for a General Law city.
“These Sections are primarily Government Code § 36501,38630,1029 and 1031. POST interprets these laws to mean that every person appointed to the position of chief of police, either as an interim or permanent appointment, is a peace officer and must satisfy all the applicable peace officer selection standards. In addition, as a condition of continued employment, a chief of police must obtain the (California) POST Basic Certificate within two years of appointment, if the individual does not possess the certificate.”
“While these requirements establish a minimum standard,” Hancock explains, “the City of Susanville has established a competitive salary and benefit package to aid in the recruitment and retention of qualified individuals and circulated a recruitment that yielded a candidate whose qualifications greatly exceeded these minimums.”
According to the City Administrator the job announcement circulated in late August 2016 and stated that the City would consider, “Any combination of experience and training that would provide the required knowledge and abilities…”
“The recruitment was not closed or restricted to current City of Susanville peace officers. It was designed to be inclusive in nature and to provide the best possible candidates for the position. Candidates were encouraged to apply if they believed that the combination of their experience and training provided them with the required knowledge and ability to be considered. Candidates supply a cover letter, resume and application outlining their qualifications, additional information and documentation is often provided through the application process to quantify training and experience that is later verified through pre-employment screening and background investigation.”
“Applicants are screened based on City and State eligibility requirements and the most qualified candidates were invited to participate in a formal panel interview consisting of Law Enforcement and Management professionals who regularly participate in the hiring process. The top candidates are invited to proceed to interviews with the City Administrator and City Council. The City Administrator obtained approval from the City Council to extend an offer of employment to the selected candidate and to proceed with the appointment after successful completion of a pre-employment screening and background investigation. This process can take anywhere from three (3) to twelve (12) weeks, or longer depending on the amount of verification required. The City of Susanville Municipal Code outlines the duties of the City Administrator as it relates to appointments in § 2.08.090 as follows:
“2.08.090 Powers and duties—Appointment, removal, promotion and demotion of officers and employees.
“It shall be the duty of the city administrator to appoint and remove or promote or demote any and all officers and employees of the city with the approval of the city council, except the city attorney, and any elected position or officer. (Ord. 09-970 § 1, 2009; Ord. 04-912 § 1, 2004; Ord. 98-848 § 1; prior code § 2.60)”
According to Hancock the City Council interviewed the top candidates on November 17th, 2016 and unanimously approved the selection. The City Council then gave direction to the City Administrator to extend a conditional offer of employment, initiate the background investigation and make the appointment.
“Upon successful completion of a pre-employment screening, background investigation and verification of qualifications the Chief of Police was sworn in on Jan 23rd 2017 and began working on a transition with the outgoing Interim Chief with a more formal ceremony and introduction occurring at the February 1st City Council meeting.”
“Suggestions that the City employed an unorthodox recruitment, selection or hiring process, that the City Council was excluded from the process, that the City relied on fabricated credentials or that the Chief of Police lacks the qualifications to lead the Department are patently false,” Hancock stated in the press release.
The City, according to Hancock, has repeatedly invited any individuals, including the local media making claims to the contrary, to provide information or documentation to support such claims so that they can be appropriately vetted and investigated and no such information or documentation has been received.
The City Administrator concluded by saying that the City does not release the names or qualifications of unsuccessful candidates and does not release confidential employment records including pre-employment screenings and background investigations.
