[slideshow_deploy id=’899′]
BY MICHAEL OLOHAN
OF NORTHERN VALLEY PRESS
ENGLEWOOD, N.J.— Due to last-minute changes suggested by the city’s labor counsel, council members tabled Englewood’s residency hiring preference ordinance for police and fire departments Sept. 17 at its public hearing in hopes that the ordinance can pass legal muster.
The long-discussed ordinance may be amended and reintroduced at the next City Council meeting Oct. 9.
It wasn’t made clear what revisions were needed, though the labor counsel’s changes apparently allow the hiring ordinance to comply with state law.
Phone calls to Borough Attorney William Bailey and Council President Wayne Hamer to get details were not returned by press time.
Hoping to provide a preference to hire a local individual—when the candidates are equally qualified—residents shall receive preference over all other residency classes, states the ordinance.
The proposed ordinance lists “residency classes” as Class 1, Englewood residents; Class 2, residents of Bergen County; Class 3, residents of counties contiguous to Bergen County; Class 4, residents of New Jersey; and Class 5, all other applicants.
Council members have discussed the ordinance at several meetings since spring and debated whether and how the ordinance may be implemented to help Englewood residents applying for positions in the city’s police and fire departments.
Previously Councilmen Charles Cobb and Michael Cohen have said that residents deserve a preference and worked with Bailey to draft an ordinance offering such an advantage. Both have noted nearby Teaneck has an ordinance providing a residency preference.
“If the [labor counsel] issues can be worked out, we will move it forward at that time,” said Hamer Sept 17.
After a 5-0 vote to table, the ordinance was mentioned only once later when a resident, also a city firefighter, complimented the city council for raising the issue of resident preference for police and fire department employment.
Reached Sept. 18, Cohen said it was important to “codify these types of things,” meaning a preference for hiring a city resident when candidates are equally qualified. He said it’s important to have an ordinance in place to solidify the policy for future candidates.
A recent Northern Valley Press analysis of city employee data revealed 20 of 107 police employees (19 percent) were city residents as were 19 of 57 fire department employees (33 percent).
Although members had discussed including other city departments initially, the preference applies to city and fire department hiring only.
Cohen said once an ordinance is approved, other areas of the examination and hiring process may need to be looked at to give a resident a better chance at landing a fire or police position.
During previous discussions, Councilmen Cohen and Cobb both noted the ordinance may not be effective unless the hiring process is made more transparent for all candidates applying for open positions.
“What we are allowed to do in this regard [hiring preference] is extraordinarily limited,” Cohen said. He said while such an ordinance may not add many local residents to either public safety department, it was still important to put such an ordinance on the books.
During public comments, Englewood resident and firefighter Lt. Joseph Hoyle suggested a minimum residency of at least 24 months to qualify for the preference. The proposed ordinance requires a 12-month residency to qualify for a preference.
Council members initially debated details of a preference ordinance in April. A previous discussion of comments by the city’s labor counsel on a draft ordinance occurred in July long before ordinance introduction.
Meanwhile, in July, Police Chief Lawrence Suffern said he would develop a plan for an interview panel for police applicants that would include citizens from the city’s four wards “with an eye towards local candidates.
“Ultimately, the panel would make recommendations for hire and assist in eliminating any concerns over transparency and nepotism,” Suffern concluded in a July 2 letter to Englewood’s mayor and council.
Suffern’s plan for an interview panel was in response to allegations lodged by the Bergen County NAACP chapter that he had discriminated against an African-American police candidate.