# Police reform law and MPTC waivers/exemptions



## NEPS

I would be interested in hearing from any officer hired in a full-time capacity who received a waiver or exemption from MCJTC or MPTC from attending a Massachusetts academy owing to previous attendance at an out of state academy. Under the reform law, these waivers/exemptions expire on December 31, 2021 and further action is needed in order to continue being certified. I would like to know what anyone has heard about the process for officers affect by this section -- 102(c) -- of the reform law.


----------



## mpd61

Honestly,
I don't think ANYTHING has been clearly established yet in print. Not even much around in way of proposals being leaked. I think it is one of the most ridiculous items to come out of this mess. I work with a fellow with prior NYPD, and now about 13 years full time with two municipalities, no break in service. He's already been told by one dumbass he's done by Christmas. If that's true, it's 110% ludicrous!


----------



## MiamiVice

POST didn't even have staff or an office. Good luck, I'm guessing 2023 by the time anything makes sense

Sent from my SM-G986U1 using Tapatalk


----------



## felony

I have an exemption. As far as this post crap goes, it's business as usual until the MPTC says otherwise. The only concerning part is that Boston has already axed it's special program.


----------



## PBC FL Cop

All Exemptions were set to expire in December, however, those involved with drafting the reform law did not fully understand the difference between permanent exemptions and temporary waivers. It was believed the training for both were equal and obviously the word "permanent" appears to have confused them as well. As of now, the expiration of the permanent exemptions is being clarified and as of our last meeting, permanent exemptions are not expected to expire in December or ever expire. Massachusetts employs numerous police chiefs who received permanent exemptions and the Mass Chiefs and MPTC are working diligently to correct this issue. Anyone currently working under a permanent exemption need not be overly concerned about this issue at this point. 

Stay safe!!


----------



## felony

Does anyone have any further information? My chief is clueless.


----------



## mpd61

felony said:


> Does anyone have any further information? My chief is clueless.


What he don't Zoom?


----------



## felony

mpd61 said:


> What he don't Zoom?


Apparently not. He thinks the police reform is nothing but a suggestion.


----------



## NEPS

PBC FL Cop said:


> All Exemptions were set to expire in December, however, those involved with drafting the reform law did not fully understand the difference between permanent exemptions and temporary waivers. It was believed the training for both were equal and obviously the word "permanent" appears to have confused them as well. As of now, the expiration of the permanent exemptions is being clarified and as of our last meeting, permanent exemptions are not expected to expire in December or ever expire. Massachusetts employs numerous police chiefs who received permanent exemptions and the Mass Chiefs and MPTC are working diligently to correct this issue. Anyone currently working under a permanent exemption need not be overly concerned about this issue at this point.


Thank you for this info!


----------



## Roy Fehler

PBC FL Cop said:


> Massachusetts employs numerous police chiefs who received permanent exemptions and the Mass Chiefs and MPTC are working diligently to correct this issue.


Who wants to bet that the chiefs will carve out an exemption to keep their exemptions, while screwing everyone else?


----------



## Inspector71

Roy Fehler said:


> Who wants to bet that the chiefs will carve out an exemption to keep their exemptions, while screwing everyone else?


Nooooo........
Everyone is good. Except Auxiliaries.


----------



## NEPS

I have heard that, during an MPTC meeting on October 27, the committee took some formal action regarding permanent exemptions. Did anyone happen to watch the meeting or otherwise hear what happened?


----------



## mpd61

NEPS said:


> I have heard that, during an MPTC meeting on October 27, the committee took some formal action regarding permanent exemptions. Did anyone happen to watch the meeting or otherwise hear what happened?











Police Reform (Part Timers)


Anybody know if the audio or printed minutes from that last committee meeting is available and how to obtain either? Just be curious to follow how that discussion evolved and the website isn't exactly up to date. Thanks Agreed! Enquiring minds want to know..............




www.masscops.com





LOOK AT BOTTOM of P.24 here.......


----------



## Dpty1sp

Police reform- state police highways and campus colleges. Sheriffs office patrol entire county except large cities boom. It’d be amazing to have an entire county to patrol like down south.


----------



## felony

Dpty1sp said:


> Police reform- state police highways and campus colleges. Sheriffs office patrol entire county except large cities boom. It’d be amazing to have an entire county to patrol like down south.


For $15 hr


----------



## Roy Fehler

Dpty1sp said:


> Police reform- state police highways and campus colleges. Sheriffs office patrol entire county except large cities boom. It’d be amazing to have an entire county to patrol like down south.


Too bad that sheriffs in Massachusetts have limited powers of arrest.

Boom.


----------



## Dpty1sp

Not after reform… everyone is “suppose” to be the same.


----------



## EJS12213

Dpty1sp said:


> Not after reform… everyone is “suppose” to be the same.


The reform doesn't make everyone the same. It just requires everyone who exercises arrest powers to meet the same minimal standards regardless of authority. Each different law enforcement position will still have the same limitations regardless of training. So if a deputy was to attend and pass the FT muni academy doesnt mean they can go out and do everything a municipal cop can. They would have to change the law to expand deputy sheriff authority.


----------



## HuskyH-2

Dpty1sp said:


> Not after reform… everyone is “suppose” to be the same.


Incorrect. Reform standardizes training requirements. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Roy Fehler

Dpty1sp said:


> Not after reform… everyone is “suppose” to be the same.


No, all the reform bill did was standardize training requirements, it did absolutely nothing to expand the jurisdiction of any agency.


----------



## Dpty1sp

I’m not talking about jurisdiction. I’m talking about the definition of a law enforcement officer. Campus cops, hospital, towns, sheriffs are all defined the same under post.


----------



## Roy Fehler

Dpty1sp said:


> I’m not talking about jurisdiction. I’m talking about the definition of a law enforcement officer. Campus cops, hospital, towns, sheriffs are all defined the same under post.


No, they’re not. Sheriffs, constables, campus, hospital, and part-time cops who don’t complete the full-time _POLICE_ (not corrections) academy no longer have powers of arrest.


----------



## HuskyH-2

Dpty1sp said:


> I’m not talking about jurisdiction. I’m talking about the definition of a law enforcement officer. Campus cops, hospital, towns, sheriffs are all defined the same under post.


No. The law enforcement officer definition was to address who was subject to the new training requirements. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## NEPS

Regarding the original question for this thread: I spoke to Sheila Gallagher, Director of Operations for MPTC. The Committee did vote last week that the recipients of previous permanent exemptions granted by MPTC or MCJTC should be certified...

*HOWEVER*

POST gets to have _its_ say about whether and on what terms POST will decide to provide certification to officers who received those permanent exemptions. POST's decision has yet to be made, and she could offer no opinion as to what that decision will be.


----------



## Foxy85

I would imagine that police officers coming from out of state that have some form of POST from their original state of hire would smoothly transition over to Mass.

The whole reason for this was to “standardize” training right? One would think if you’re currently working here from another state that already had their version of POST established, it would be a no-brainer.


----------



## Dpty1sp

What about SSPO permanent exemptions, very similar qualifications?


----------



## mpd61

Dpty1sp said:


> What about SSPO permanent exemptions, very similar qualifications?


All due respect......
What the Bloody Hell is an "SSPO permanent exemption"
I think there NEVER has been such animal. Are you confusing an SSPO _Waiver _with an_ Exemption? _They are two different things.
SSPO waivered individuals have clearly been identified as having to attend the Bridge Academy. Pretty sure the two distinct terms, Permanent Exemption and SSPO were NEVER identified together in any CMR, directive or discussion before. Oh my stars and garters!


----------



## HuskyH-2

mpd61 said:


> All due respect......
> What the Bloody Hell is an "SSPO permanent exemption"
> I think there NEVER has been such animal. Are you confusing an SSPO _Waiver _with an_ Exemption? _They are two different things.
> SSPO waivered individuals have clearly been identified as having to attend the Bridge Academy. Pretty sure the two distinct terms, Permanent Exemption and SSPO were NEVER identified together in any CMR, directive or discussion before. Oh my stars and garters!


SSPO has exemptions for out of staters


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Dpty1sp

Lol I know! This is from the state police certification unit. :


IV. Petition for Permanent Exemption
Permanent Exemptions from attending a Municipal Police Academy or Special State Police Officer Academy may be considered for highly qualified applicants, based upon documented training, experience, and credentials relevant to the position held by the applicant (i.e. Chief, Public Safety Director, Patrol Officer, etc.). Minimum eligibility for a Permanent Exemption includes the following:
• The candidate must be a U.S. citizen and at least 19 years old on the day the exemption petition is submitted and possess a High School diploma or proof of a G.E.D./HiSET.
• The candidate must have completed entry-level training that is substantially equivalent to (in terms of number of hours and curriculum) or greater than the SSPO

Academy. This would include a comparison of the candidate’s full time academy hours and any additional training received during their career that was applicable to equate to the number of hours the SSPO Academy during the same year. (i.e., Candidate graduated an out of state academy in 2013, and his/her hours would be compared with that of an SSPO graduate during the same year.)
• The candidate must successfully pass a Special State Police Officer exemption exam within 90 days of exemption approval.
Petitions for Permanent Exemptions must be filed by the appointing authority of the employing agency and must include the following documentation:
• Current resume of applicant.
• Current certification in CPR and First Aid.
• Current qualification in Use of Firearms by an MPTC or MSP certified instructor,
if applicable.
• Copy of the curriculum for the entry-level training program attended, including a
breakdown of course titles and hours, and copy of graduation certificate.
• A letter from the applicant's prior agency confirming the applicant's law
enforcement service and time served with the respective agency.
No candidate for this exemption will be considered if they have previously attended a Police Academy and separated from said Academy for academic, attendance, or disciplinary reasons. Should a candidate separate from a Police Academy for academic or attendance reasons, the candidate will be deemed ineligible to receive Special State Police Authority for one (1) year from the date of separation. Should a candidate separate from a Police Academy for any disciplinary reason(s), the candidate will be deemed ineligible to receive Special State Police Authority for two (2) years from the date of separation.


----------



## Dpty1sp

https://www.mass.gov/doc/special-state-police-equivalency-guidelines/download


----------



## Roy Fehler

Dpty1sp said:


> Lol I know! This is from the state police certification unit. :
> 
> 
> IV. Petition for Permanent Exemption
> Permanent Exemptions from attending a Municipal Police Academy or Special State Police Officer Academy may be considered for highly qualified applicants, based upon documented training, experience, and credentials relevant to the position held by the applicant (i.e. Chief, Public Safety Director, Patrol Officer, etc.). Minimum eligibility for a Permanent Exemption includes the following:
> • The candidate must be a U.S. citizen and at least 19 years old on the day the exemption petition is submitted and possess a High School diploma or proof of a G.E.D./HiSET.
> • The candidate must have completed entry-level training that is substantially equivalent to (in terms of number of hours and curriculum) or greater than the SSPO
> 
> Academy. This would include a comparison of the candidate’s full time academy hours and any additional training received during their career that was applicable to equate to the number of hours the SSPO Academy during the same year. (i.e., Candidate graduated an out of state academy in 2013, and his/her hours would be compared with that of an SSPO graduate during the same year.)
> • The candidate must successfully pass a Special State Police Officer exemption exam within 90 days of exemption approval.
> Petitions for Permanent Exemptions must be filed by the appointing authority of the employing agency and must include the following documentation:
> • Current resume of applicant.
> • Current certification in CPR and First Aid.
> • Current qualification in Use of Firearms by an MPTC or MSP certified instructor,
> if applicable.
> • Copy of the curriculum for the entry-level training program attended, including a
> breakdown of course titles and hours, and copy of graduation certificate.
> • A letter from the applicant's prior agency confirming the applicant's law
> enforcement service and time served with the respective agency.
> No candidate for this exemption will be considered if they have previously attended a Police Academy and separated from said Academy for academic, attendance, or disciplinary reasons. Should a candidate separate from a Police Academy for academic or attendance reasons, the candidate will be deemed ineligible to receive Special State Police Authority for one (1) year from the date of separation. Should a candidate separate from a Police Academy for any disciplinary reason(s), the candidate will be deemed ineligible to receive Special State Police Authority for two (2) years from the date of separation.


My God, you really need to learn how to read for comprehension.

Those were the standards for exemption for FT police academy graduates outside of Massachusetts. SSPO is only mentioned as a minimum benchmark because it’s considered a lower-level of training, compared to the full-time MPTC Municipal Academy.

I know you won’t believe me, but I’ll give it a shot anyway; your corrections and/or R/I academy, plus your experience either behind the wall, serving civil process, working details, or pretending to be a cop DOES NOT satisfy the POST requirements for police officer.

It’s either up (full police academy) or out (no arrest powers) for you.


----------



## CCCSD

I think it has to do with is a Hat required or not when enforcing Chap 90.


----------



## NEPS

Way back in the olden times, I think any out of state academy would do when the Commissioner of Public Safety (yes, this was so long ago that the Commissioner of Public Safety, not the Colonel, had final control of the State Police) gave out special state police warrants under Chapter 147-10G. Take the criminal law ("Brown Book") exam and you were good to go.
Nothing was required from MPTC because the Commissioner (and then the Colonel) controlled it. I am interested to see how the out of state academy works for fellows who never got, nor needed, an MPTC exemption to work for a college or university and have been doing so for decades.


----------



## NEPS

Roy Fehler said:


> Those were the standards for exemption for FT police academy graduates outside of Massachusetts. SSPO is only mentioned as a minimum benchmark because it’s considered a lower-level of training, compared to the full-time MPTC Municipal Academy.


And that document from the State Police is dated April 1, 2020 -- before George Floyd was killed and before passing police reform and empowering a POST were even a dream for Massachusetts liberals.

The document has nothing to do with anything now.


----------



## Roy Fehler

NEPS said:


> The document has nothing to do with anything now.


I have absolutely no idea what that’s supposed to mean.


----------



## NEPS

Roy Fehler said:


> I have absolutely no idea what that’s supposed to mean.


I should have been clearer -- The document that Dpty1sp quoted from was issued by MSP before the police reform law imposing new training standards was passed by the legislature, so that document has no relevance to any legal reality now.


----------



## HuskyH-2

NEPS said:


> I should have been clearer -- The document that Dpty1sp quoted from was issued by MSP before the police reform law imposing new training standards was passed by the legislature, so that document has no relevance to any legal reality now.


The relevance is that the permanent exemptions that were granted when it was active, are now subject to ruling by P.O.S.T. 

He originally asked what was happening with those who received SSPO permanent exemptions.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## NEPS

HuskyH-2 said:


> The relevance is that the permanent exemptions that were granted when it was active, are now subject to ruling by P.O.S.T.
> 
> He originally asked what was happening with those who received SSPO permanent exemptions.
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


The letter Dpty1sp was quoting from was issued by the State Police concerning what MSP called "exemptions" for SSPOs appointed to work at colleges and universities. These exemptions were not the same as exemptions which the MPTC was and is empowered to grant.

Section 102(c) of Chapter 253 of the Acts of 2020 talks about exemptions but only, and specifically, exemptions granted by the *MPTC*. Whatever MSP "exemptions" might be or might have been, the police reform law does not address anywhere how MSP-granted exemptions might be extended in the way MPTC-granted exemptions may be extended.

What section 102 does address, specifically, is the training standard for reserve academy trained officers. Those officers must complete additional training as required by the MPTC.


----------



## HuskyH-2

NEPS said:


> The letter Dpty1sp was quoting from was issued by the State Police concerning what MSP called "exemptions" for SSPOs appointed to work at colleges and universities. These exemptions were not the same as exemptions which the MPTC was and is empowered to grant.
> 
> Section 102(c) of Chapter 253 of the Acts of 2020 talks about exemptions but only, and specifically, exemptions granted by the *MPTC*. Whatever MSP "exemptions" might be or might have been, the police reform law does not address anywhere how MSP-granted exemptions might be extended in the way MPTC-granted exemptions may be extended.
> 
> What section 102 does address, specifically, is the training standard for reserve academy trained officers. Those officers must complete additional training as required by the MPTC.


Ahh, I didn’t realize it specifically mentioned MPTC exemptions 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## KPD54

whats the deal with all this language mentioning a minimum age of 19, did they change it?


----------



## Dpty1sp

That’s the big concern… if you attended an SSPO academy in New Braintree you are good. But if the state police certification unit granted you an exemption from attending their academy based off of training, experience, and another POST academy we are held in limbo… there are a lot of chiefs, deputies and officers who work for colleges that have this exemption. So again where do we stand?


----------



## mpd61

Dpty1sp said:


> That’s the big concern… if you attended an SSPO academy in New Braintree you are good. But if the state police certification unit granted you an exemption from attending their academy based off of training, experience, and another POST academy we are held in limbo… there are a lot of chiefs, deputies and officers who work for colleges that have this exemption. So again where do we stand?


In a puddle of SSPO urine I'd guess.......


----------



## j809

Dpty1sp said:


> That’s the big concern… if you attended an SSPO academy in New Braintree you are good. But if the state police certification unit granted you an exemption from attending their academy based off of training, experience, and another POST academy we are held in limbo… there are a lot of chiefs, deputies and officers who work for colleges that have this exemption. So again where do we stand?


I think you’d have to attend the bridge then 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Roy Fehler

Dpty1sp said:


> That’s the big concern… if you attended an SSPO academy in New Braintree you are good. But if the state police certification unit granted you an exemption from attending their academy based off of training, experience, and another POST academy we are held in limbo… there are a lot of chiefs, deputies and officers who work for colleges that have this exemption. So again where do we stand?


I would say it totally depends on your previous training and experience, but the Bridge Academy is the most likely scenario.


----------



## NewGuy2021

Roy Fehler said:


> I would say it totally depends on your previous training and experience, but the Bridge Academy is the most likely scenario.


Is it true that SSPO’s that academy length was less than 708 hours have to bridge to? Looks like it per the MPTC FAQs… so guys with r/i, sspo less than 708 hours and the out of state sspo waivers may all have to bridge… thats like the majority of my department!!


----------



## Roy Fehler

NewGuy2021 said:


> Is it true that SSPO’s that academy length was less than 708 hours have to bridge to? Looks like it per the MPTC FAQs… so guys with r/i, sspo less than 708 hours and the out of state sspo waivers may all have to bridge… thats like the majority of my department!!


R/I academy graduates and SSPO graduates (except from the MSP-run SSPO academy at New Braintree) will have to do the Bridge Academy, they have a certain amount of time to complete it (time depends on your last name, it’s alphabetical).


----------



## NewGuy2021

Roy Fehler said:


> R/I academy graduates and SSPO graduates (except from the MSP-run SSPO academy at New Braintree) will have to do the Bridge Academy, they have a certain amount of time to complete it (time depends on your last name, it’s alphabetical).


Tracking all of that… my question/statements is that the MPTC FAQs and bridge Academy page states if the New Braintree SSPO class was less than 708 hours of curriculum they must bridge. Can’t imagine guys that SSPO’d in the 90s or 2000s took 708 hours… our PD has many SSPO graduates but I don’t know how many have the 708 hour requirement which now means we have a lot more that will need to bridge than we thought when the law was passed. Have a good day everyone and happy veterans day to those that earned the right to celebrate


----------



## j809

NewGuy2021 said:


> Tracking all of that… my question/statements is that the MPTC FAQs and bridge Academy page states if the New Braintree SSPO class was less than 708 hours of curriculum they must bridge. Can’t imagine guys that SSPO’d in the 90s or 2000s took 708 hours… our PD has many SSPO graduates but I don’t know how many have the 708 hour requirement which now means we have a lot more that will need to bridge than we thought when the law was passed. Have a good day everyone and happy veterans day to those that earned the right to celebrate


If you attended a residential academy at New Braintree SSPO academy, you do not have to bridge. They will have full waiver.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## NewGuy2021

j809 said:


> If you attended a residential academy at New Braintree SSPO academy, you do not have to bridge. They will have full waiver.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


So this from MPTC FAQs from October 4, 2021is wrong? Big if true….


“Are Special State Police Officers [SSPOs] Who Obtained a Warrant by attending a Training Academy run by the Massachusetts State Police academy in new Braintreeexempt from the MPTC bridge academy?
Yes, SSPOs who obtained their official warrant from the Colonel of the MSP by attending the Massachusetts State Police Academy held in New Braintree, MA consisting of 708 hours of curriculum are NOT required to attend the MPTC Bridge Academy based on successfully completing and passing the comprehensive training program offered by the Massachusetts State Police. 

Are sspos who obtained a warrant by attending a training academy run by the Massachusetts state police in a location other than new Braintree also exempt from attending the MPTC bridge academy?
No, only those SSPOs who attended the New Braintree training academy training program consisting of at least 708 hours of curriculum, are exempt from attending the MPTC Bridge Academy. This is due to the fact that only the New Braintree site offered a comprehensive 708 hours of curriculum. Any program less than 708 hours of curriculum offered at the New Braintree site will not exempt an officer from being required to attend the Bridge Academy.”


----------



## j809

Dude they said so for a while at the meetings. Relax breathe 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## NewGuy2021

j809 said:


> Dude they said so for a while at the meetings. Relax breathe
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Just trying to clarify, thank you.


----------

