# New MPTC Academies



## ClintEastwood4Sheriff

There has been some information that has been put out in regards to a new MPTC Academy format. Is the MPTC shortening the academies? Thanks in advance for any information.


----------



## pahapoika

Interesting. 

Talking with the owner of a local "sporting goods store" . Said the reserve intermittent would soon be the same hours as the full-time Academy just taken on a part-time basis.

Eventually everybody will have to attend the full-time Academy and just deal with the inconvenience / hardship.

Could be a blow to departments that heavily augment their force with part-timers. Can understand the reasons for bringing part-time up to full time Academy standards.

Will be hard finding people to sacrifice three months of their lives.


----------



## j809

ClintEastwood4Sheriff said:


> There has been some information that has been put out in regards to a new MPTC Academy format. Is the MPTC shortening the academies? Thanks in advance for any information.


I think they're talking about reducing it to 19 weeks.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## samadam78

pahapoika said:


> Interesting.
> 
> Talking with the owner of a local "sporting goods store" . Said the reserve intermittent would soon be the same hours as the full-time Academy just taken on a part-time basis.
> 
> Eventually everybody will have to attend the full-time Academy and just deal with the inconvenience / hardship.
> 
> Could be a blow to departments that heavily augment their force with part-timers. Can understand the reasons for bringing part-time up to full time Academy standards.
> 
> Will be hard finding people to sacrifice three months of their lives.


My opinion on this is simple... if you're on the road (town or college) and making (or have power to make) arrests you should have full time academy hours. If your just doing it for details or Like animal control than fine short reserve academy is ok. These departments using part time academy trained guys to work solo patroLs for 75% of their shift coverage is a liability in my opinion


----------



## patrol22

Cut out the D&C, and BS feel good filler and you could cut the FT Academy down several weeks. Although more time should be spent on criminal and MV law, I remember when I went through most of it was just breezing through power points and not really understanding it.


----------



## Bloodhound

I believe the Randolph academy which starts tomorrow is 23 weeks.


----------



## Edmizer1

samadam78 said:


> My opinion on this is simple... if you're on the road (town or college) and making (or have power to make) arrests you should have full time academy hours. If your just doing it for details or Like animal control than fine short reserve academy is ok. These departments using part time academy trained guys to work solo patroLs for 75% of their shift coverage is a liability in my opinion


You are right to an extent. Many town PDs are 100% part-time, are constantly turning over their staffs, and are essentially covered by MSP. These PDs really only nibble at law enforcement and back off when something real needs to be handled. The argument can be made that these officers should be full-time academy trained but its just not feasible. A guy I work with has a brother who is a police chief in Maine. He tells us that Maine has a system where part-timers have a certain amount of hours allotted to them to work. Once you reach your yearly cap, you can't work until the next year. Seasonal officers could use up their hours working full-time in the summer and others may use it up by working a few hours a week year round. I have heard of part-time officers in Mass who routinely work 40+ hours a week, either with one PD or several at the same time.


----------



## Treehouse413

ClintEastwood4Sheriff said:


> There has been some information that has been put out in regards to a new MPTC Academy format. Is the MPTC shortening the academies? Thanks in advance for any information.


Yes I believe 18 weeks.


----------



## patrol22

Edmizer1 said:


> You are right to an extent. Many town PDs are 100% part-time, are constantly turning over their staffs, and are essentially covered by MSP. These PDs really only nibble at law enforcement and back off when something real needs to be handled. The argument can be made that these officers should be full-time academy trained but its just not feasible. A guy I work with has a brother who is a police chief in Maine. He tells us that Maine has a system where part-timers have a certain amount of hours allotted to them to work. Once you reach your yearly cap, you can't work until the next year. Seasonal officers could use up their hours working full-time in the summer and others may use it up by working a few hours a week year round. I have heard of part-time officers in Mass who routinely work 40+ hours a week, either with one PD or several at the same time.


Here's the bigger question, why do these "P/T" depts even exist? Wouldn't a regional department with a handful of full time officers make sense?


----------



## RodneyFarva

patrol22 said:


> Here's the bigger question, why do these "P/T" depts even exist? Wouldn't a regional department with a handful of full time officers make sense?


quick answer: politics and cash.


----------



## mpd61

samadam78 said:


> My opinion on this is simple... if you're on the road (town or college) and making (or have power to make) arrests you should have full time academy hours. If your just doing it for details or Like animal control than fine short reserve academy is ok. These departments using part time academy trained guys to work solo patroLs for 75% of their shift coverage is a *liability* in my opinion


Ahhhh
_"LIABILITY" _
Really? You must worship Ron Glidden. It burns my ears to hear the anti-PT crap being slung around here for years. Many municipalities have operated like this for DECADES due to budget, plain and simple. PT officers working 24, 32, or even 40+ hours, sometimes at more than one department, have served and performed successfully for DECADES. Many of you here act like PT officers make the news every week in some negative fashion. Many of you started out your careers as PT with fire in your bellies, and open minds willing to listen and learn. You also have FT cops working at some agencies that are making arrests, with no guns or cruisers. Any "Liability" there? Many of them are FT without MPOC. Does that make them any less capable? Too may variables exist in Mass L.E. right now to make simple blanket assertions like above.


----------



## svthlcpdmedic

I heard there is a bill on captial hill to obolish auxillary police and part time officers would only be allowed to do details.


----------



## mpd61

svthlcpdmedic said:


> I heard there is a bill on captial hill to obolish auxillary police and part time officers would only be allowed to do details.


1. State House or Beacon Hill for mass legislature, not "captial hill"
2 Abolish not "obolish"
The rumor you choose to perpetuate would probably take separate actions; auxiliary police come under MEMA statutes.
back in 2015 Senator Bruce Tarr introduced a bill that spoke about establishing Level I, II, and III powers and duties for police/sheriff/auxiliaries. It was an interesting read, made it through a couple of committees, but died....................


----------



## Edmizer1

mpd61 said:


> 1. State House or Beacon Hill for mass legislature, not "captial hill"
> 2 Abolish not "obolish"
> The rumor you choose to perpetuate would probably take separate actions; auxiliary police come under MEMA statutes.
> back in 2015 Senator Bruce Tarr introduced a bill that spoke about establishing Level I, II, and III powers and duties for police/sheriff/auxiliaries. It was an interesting read, made it through a couple of committees, but died....................


I did not see the Massachusetts level I, II, III bill but it sounds interesting. I think Maine has a rule that part-timers have to turn over any felony invests to a full-time officer. I know some states have established alternate titles like "Conservator of the Peace" and "Peace Officer" and I know New Jersey has "Class II" police officers. I know "Conservator of the Peace" is popular down south and is essentially a law enforcement officer with limited powers. I know the "peace officer" designation in New York is complicated.


----------



## Bloodhound

svthlcpdmedic said:


> I heard there is a bill on captial hill to obolish auxillary police and part time officers would only be allowed to do details.


 This sentence is an obortion.


----------



## patrol22

Bloodhound said:


> This sentence is an obortion.


Ahh the O'Bortions, good ole Irish family from the old country


----------



## 9319

I’ll make it easy: 1. Merge the SSPO and R/I into one Academy. Run them at community colleges as part of the CJ program. The cert would be good for PT/campus/special work. You would pump out 600+ kids a year easy. 2. Create a bridge program into a full time academy held regionally. Less time/money. 3. Open ONE residential academy for everyone else. 4. The state should open a mass maritime type junior college. The type where every year 300-500 some od kids could walk out with an Associates in CJ and a FT academy. O well what do I know.


----------



## mpd61

Javert said:


> I'll make it easy: 1. Merge the SSPO and R/I into one Academy. Run them at community colleges as part of the CJ program. The cert would be good for PT/campus/special work. You would pump out 600+ kids a year easy. 2. Create a bridge program into a full time academy held regionally. Less time/money. 3. Open ONE residential academy for everyone else. 4. The state should open a mass maritime type junior college. The type where every year 300-500 some od kids could walk out with an Associates in CJ and a FT academy. O well what do I know.


What you say makes sense, however, I'll do the next logical progression; 
Make it ALL the same length and same Cert across the board...................


----------



## 9319

mpd61 said:


> What you say makes sense, however, I'll do the next logical progression;
> Make it ALL the same length and same Cert across the board...................


I agree that ONE standard for everyone with Police powers is the way to go. However, I realize there may be Chiefs and political types who would not like to see that happen. So at the very least, merge the SSPO and R/I (R/I being a joke of a program anyway) programs into one curriculum at community colleges and then create a bridge program.


----------



## RodneyFarva

mpd61 said:


> What you say makes sense, however, I'll do the next logical progression;
> Make it ALL the same length and same Cert across the board...................


Just about 75% of state troopers just stroked out because of this sentence.
"I WAS IN THE FIRST PLATOON OF THE XXRTT IN NEW BRAINTR... !!!!....(flat line)"


----------



## Edmizer1

Javert said:


> I'll make it easy: 1. Merge the SSPO and R/I into one Academy. Run them at community colleges as part of the CJ program. The cert would be good for PT/campus/special work. You would pump out 600+ kids a year easy. 2. Create a bridge program into a full time academy held regionally. Less time/money. 3. Open ONE residential academy for everyone else. 4. The state should open a mass maritime type junior college. The type where every year 300-500 some od kids could walk out with an Associates in CJ and a FT academy. O well what do I know.


The closest thing to this experiment was the "Law Enforcement Certificate" program run by the MPTC about 15 years ago. Candidates with a certain amount of experience, with R/I academy, and at least an associates in CJ degree, could attend an academy that was about 1/2 shorter than a regular recruit academy. The experiment was a failure. Chiefs complained that the graduates were not prepared for full time municipal policing . My PD made several hires during this period and we got some good guys under that program but that academy did not do them any favors. These guys were absolutely not trained to the level of a full time academy.


----------



## j809

College chiefs will be against this big time. They should open one regional academy on Devens. Airfield is right there for evoc
Too. Plenty of land for free 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## visible25

RodneyFarva said:


> quick answer: politics and cash.


Same as why we have 6 different deparments on Martha's Vineyard...

During my academy we also heard the MPTC run academies will drop to a 18 week program as a trial. If all goes well, ALL academies will shift to that template. Basically shifting towards a POST statewide system


----------



## mpd61

j809 said:


> College chiefs will be against this big time. They should open one regional academy on Devens. Airfield is right there for evoc
> Too. Plenty of land for free


As usual, you're spot on Yimmy! You and I can teach then when you retire......................


----------



## Roy Fehler

j809 said:


> College chiefs will be against this big time. They should open one regional academy on Devens. Airfield is right there for evoc
> Too. Plenty of land for free


One central academy wouldn't be regional, the system in place now is regional. Not to mention Boston PD will never give up their own academy.


----------



## j809

They can have one academy all setup at Devens just like other states and they can invest a lot of money at airfield for skids etc. Msp can still have new Braintree and Boston have their own. This would be MPTC only


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## samadam78

mpd61 said:


> Ahhhh
> _"LIABILITY" _
> Really? You must worship Ron Glidden. It burns my ears to hear the anti-PT crap being slung around here for years. Many municipalities have operated like this for DECADES due to budget, plain and simple. PT officers working 24, 32, or even 40+ hours, sometimes at more than one department, have served and performed successfully for DECADES. Many of you here act like PT officers make the news every week in some negative fashion. Many of you started out your careers as PT with fire in your bellies, and open minds willing to listen and learn. You also have FT cops working at some agencies that are making arrests, with no guns or cruisers. Any "Liability" there? Many of them are FT without MPOC. Does that make them any less capable? Too may variables exist in Mass L.E. right now to make simple blanket assertions like above.


I don't worship Glidden; to be honest I could care less about him... I'll be blunt mass needs (but will never get) a COMPLETE overhaul of the police system. We have 12-15 towns in an area with little population with 12-15 chiefs making t much money with take home cars etc.... Our hiring system (civil service) is a joke... SSPO is a joke.... campus POLICE working unarmed is a joke as well.... PT officers are a great force multiplier BUT they should be held to the same standard as any other police officer. However you want to deliver that training is fine by me but EVERYONE campus, town, city, state should be trained to the same standards in my opinion.


----------



## 9319

Side thought: I’d argue that there’s enough FT cops in the state willing to go to the MSP. If the MSP hired only already FT cops (with FT academy’s) they could cut there initial entry training in half. Don’t worry, they can still do all the swirlys and raindeer games they want, but a 3 month transistinal training program could return 200ish new pairs of boots a pop. Or 400ish highly training, already experienced cops every 6 months.


----------



## CapeSpecial

1. Create ONE police academy program that everyone goes to (that can be at several different campuses). Everyone (public colleges, private colleges, county deputies doing anything other than corrections, town cops, city cops, transit cops, environmental cops, harbormasters, and whatever else is out there) comes out with a full time academy certification. 
2. Eliminate PT from the academy all together OR require PT standards while you're on the job. Some of the PT standards in particular academies are RIDICULOUS when the day after graduation you can go back to being a fat slob.
3. Get rid of SSPO appointments for all public colleges and universities. Create one "Massachusetts Campus Police Department) where everyone has the same uniform, cruisers, statewide authority, etc. Keep SSPO for private schools like it's supposed to be.

I'm done.


----------



## pahapoika

patrol22 said:


> Here's the bigger question, why do these "P/T" depts even exist? Wouldn't a regional department with a handful of full time officers make sense?


In other parts of the country this is called the Sheriff's Department


----------



## Roy Fehler

patrol22 said:


> Here's the bigger question, why do these "P/T" depts even exist? Wouldn't a regional department with a handful of full time officers make sense?


There's been a regional police law on the books for decades, so if small towns want to regionalize, they can.

The problem is that no town wants to give up "their" police department, and the ability to hire who they want, not who people in 2-3 other towns want to hire.

General Law - Part I, Title VII, Chapter 41, Section 99B


----------



## PG1911

CapeSpecial said:


> 3. Get rid of SSPO appointments for all public colleges and universities. Create one "Massachusetts Campus Police Department) where everyone has the same uniform, cruisers, statewide authority, etc. Keep SSPO for private schools like it's supposed to be.


The thing is, since some private schools (BU, BC, MIT, and Harvard, to name a few) require the FT academy and won't take the SSPO academy or the R/I academy+CJ major waiver thing, I'd say just get rid of SSPO altogether, for both public and private schools. Have two types of academies only: Troopers go to the State Police Academy, everyone else, be it municipal PD, public university PD, or private university PD, all get certified through the municipal academies. You can jump from being a cop at some tiny liberal arts school to a big city department without having to go back to another academy. I'm sure the private schools would go apeshit over that though, since SSPO is a good tactic to make sure that officers can't jump ship to municipal PDs with better pay and benefits.


----------



## EJS12213

Roy Fehler said:


> There's been a regional police law on the books for decades, so if small towns want to regionalize, they can.
> 
> The problem is that no town wants to give up "their" police department, and the ability to hire who they want, not who people in 2-3 other towns want to hire.
> 
> General Law - Part I, Title VII, Chapter 41, Section 99B


I know of at least two towns that did it. Hardwick, ma took over policing for New Braintree.


----------



## patrol22

What I don’t understand as everyone says it’s politics in Massachusetts that prevents regionalization from happening. Look at Long Island, Metro Virginia and Maryland. They all have many County Police Departments in urban areas. If these highly political areas can do it why can’t we?


----------



## CCCSD

Si Se Puede.


----------



## PG1911

Roy Fehler said:


> There's been a regional police law on the books for decades, so if small towns want to regionalize, they can.
> 
> The problem is that no town wants to give up "their" police department, and the ability to hire who they want, not who people in 2-3 other towns want to hire.


Regional PDs are very common in PA, but they are often very unstable for the reasons you stated. Towns join and leave regional PDs as the municipal governments realize, as you said, that they don't have full control over the PD. The dumbest thing is that a lot of towns there would actually prefer to have no PD at all than share one with any other town.



patrol22 said:


> What I don't understand as everyone says it's politics in Massachusetts that prevents regionalization from happening. Look at Long Island, Metro Virginia and Maryland. They all have many County Police Departments in urban areas. If these highly political areas can do it why can't we?


Because NY, MD, and VA have full service county governments, whereas most of MA's counties only exist as geographical markers and judicial districts. In many parts of MD and VA, there is no local government, so the county provides all services that towns in MA would provide (and often more). Having the counties provide all the services in VA and MD is written into those states' statutes, and it's been standard practice there pretty much since the states came into existence. They actually set up the county/local structure that way in order to avoid this political bullshit and debates about regionalizing and stuff. For this reason, I think those two states probably have the most efficient law enforcement setup in the country. It'll never happen here in New England though.


----------



## Goose

patrol22 said:


> What I don't understand as everyone says it's politics in Massachusetts that prevents regionalization from happening. Look at Long Island, Metro Virginia and Maryland. They all have many County Police Departments in urban areas. If these highly political areas can do it why can't we?


County Police. A couple years ago we had a member on I think a department in Virginia. I don't remember if he was talking about VA or MD, but if you get the state police, the county police, and the city police all at a scene and they're all in their jurisdiction, that the county police had more authority there than everyone else.

And that's why it wouldn't work in MA.


----------



## Roy Fehler

patrol22 said:


> What I don't understand as everyone says it's politics in Massachusetts that prevents regionalization from happening. Look at Long Island, Metro Virginia and Maryland. They all have many County Police Departments in urban areas. If these highly political areas can do it why can't we?


You have a lot to learn about Massachusetts politics/nepotism.

Anyway, the big question is, why do you care? Towns can regionalize if they want, they've had the option for decades, and yet the tidal wave majority haven't. I'd say that's their business.


----------



## patrol22

Roy Fehler said:


> You have a lot to learn about Massachusetts politics/nepotism.
> 
> Anyway, the big question is, why do you care? Towns can regionalize if they want, they've had the option for decades, and yet the tidal wave majority haven't. I'd say that's their business.


Trust me, I am well aware of how this state works. My questions are more just me thinking out loud as I already know the answer.

I guess I care because it can save money, provide better services, increase safety etc.


----------



## PBC FL Cop

County police and/or county sheriff's are typically responsible for the unincorporated areas of the county. Massachusetts does not have ANY _unincorporated_ areas, all land is Massachusetts is _incorporated_ therefore the MA Sheriffs do not have any _primary_ law enforcement jurisdictions in the Commonwealth. I'm not arguing the law enforcement authority of a MA sheriff but rather what a sheriff's traditional jurisdiction is and why MA Sheriff's do not have a traditional patrol function.

Sheriff's are typically the highest law enforcement officer in the county due to the fact they are the only elected law enforcement official. Elected officials represent and answer to their electorate and therefore are typically granted higher authority than appointed officials.


----------



## CCCSD

You could fix all this if you just made everyone an SSPO. I mean, there’s even State in the title...


----------



## Goose

CCCSD said:


> You could fix all this if you just made everyone an SSPO. I mean, there's even State in the title...


FUCK SSPO!!!!!!!


----------



## PG1911

PBC FL Cop said:


> County police and/or county sheriff's are typically responsible for the unincorporated areas of the county. Massachusetts does not have ANY _unincorporated_ areas, all land is Massachusetts is _incorporated_ therefore the MA Sheriffs do not have any _primary_ law enforcement jurisdictions in the Commonwealth. I'm not arguing the law enforcement authority of a MA sheriff but rather what a sheriff's traditional jurisdiction is and why MA Sheriff's do not have a traditional patrol function.
> 
> Sheriff's are typically the highest law enforcement officer in the county due to the fact they are the only elected law enforcement official. Elected officials represent and answer to their electorate and therefore are typically granted higher authority than appointed officials.


There are some states that have fully incorporated land and still have full service county sheriff's offices or police departments. New York comes to mind. With the exception of NYC, all the counties have either SOs or PDs, most of which provide full law enforcement services. NY has four layers of law enforcement, and each level of government can choose whether to do LE themselves or defer to the level above them: Villages can have their own PD or let their town cover them, towns can have a PD or let the county sheriff or police cover them, and counties can either choose to cover those towns or let the NY State Police cover them.

The main reason why the position of sheriff is so limited in MA is that counties, and by extension, sheriffs, have never really been a big thing in MA, or any of the 3 southern New England states for that matter. All the towns have home rule, and everyone identifies by their town, and not their county. The idea of a county sheriff instead of town police is just foreign to Mass.


----------



## mpd61

CCCSD said:


> You could fix all this if you just made everyone an SSPO. I mean, there's even State in the title...





Goose said:


> FUCK SSPO!!!!!!!


I love you guys!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## Edmizer1

_"You could fix all this if you just made everyone an SSPO. I mean, there's even State in the title..._"

This is one of the best posts I've seen on Masscops.


----------



## PG1911

CCCSD said:


> You could fix all this if you just made everyone an SSPO. I mean, there's even State in the title...


It also has Special in the title. That kinda like makes it like special forces or something...


----------



## CCCSD

Oooohhhh... didn’t think about THAT! Yeah Boy!!


----------



## USM C-2

PG1911 said:


> It also has Special in the title. That kinda like makes it like special forces or something...


Can we wear berets?


----------



## Edmizer1

It would also make everyone feel "Special", which is a good thing for everyone.


----------



## CCCSD

USM C-3 said:


> Can we wear berets?


Back in the ghetto days, my partner and I donned Blue UN Berets While manning a traffic checkpoint ordered by Da'Mayor. We called all drivers "Citizen" and "Comrade ". Scared the Bejesus out of the (white)commuters...

Said checkpoint was removed when the CHP ordered us to stop blocking traffic on a State Roadway, (WE knew it was BS, we just wanted to have some fun).
Good times.


----------

