Police Governance 8/25/25

Printable version

Minutes Richmond and Hinesburg Police Governance Commitee Meeting August 25 2025 125 KB

Web version

Minutes for the Meeting of the 
Richmond and Hinesburg Police Governance Committee     
August 25, 2025

Link to meeting video:

www.youtube.com/watch

Members Present: Josh Arneson Richmond Town Manager, Matt Cohen Richmond Police Sergeant, Dennis Place Hinesburg Selectboard Member, Todd Odit Hinesburg Town Manager, Frank Bryan Interim Polie Chief Hinesburg and Richmond; Bard Hill Richmond Selectboard, David Sander Richmond Selectboard, Mike Loner Hinesburg Selectboard.

Public Present: Patty Brushett, Frank Koss, Dee Barbic, Julie Scribner, Briana Brady.

Welcome and Public Comment:

Welcome by Place.

Koss: I had been confused about how you will do an interim chief if you don’t know what you are doing. There is no planned future. You have an election coming up in November. Figure out what Richmond and Hinesburg want. You will do better with an interim chief if you have direction. It would be hard to manage what is happening now with no set future. Hear what the Town wants and then give direction. 

Brushett: I am disappointed to hear that a newly hired Richmond officer went to Hinesburg. I would hope that this was a joint decision, but I don’t know if that happened. If there was not a conversation that erodes trust between the towns. There are so many questions that need to be answered by this Board. They need to be working on those questions. You are in a position of coming up with creative ideas. Should we be working together via a contract while working toward a Union Municipal District. It feels like we are adrift right now. 

Additions or Deletions to Agenda:

None.

Consideration of approval of minutes from 7/14/25

Cohen moved to approve the minutes from 7/14/25. Loner seconded. All were in favor. Motion passed.

Discussion of next steps for the short term and the long term since the Police Services and Chief
Services agreements have been paused

Odit: Josh and I met with Julie on Friday. We are not going to find an interim chief who will want to work for two different departments who are not working together. The model we had been using has run its course. The only way working together is going to work is if we create a new department. The general idea would be a new municipal district.

Place: Could we start out with one town contracting with the other?

Odit: Yes, that is possible but each Town and the Union need to agree. In the spring Hinesburg officers told me providing coverage to Richmond without reciprocal coverage from Richmond is not working. That lead to a reciprocal agreement. Which lead to inequalities between the officers. That lead to the pause of the current agreements. Richmond has a contract with the Union they are under. Hinesburg does not even have a contract. The current situation will likely remain for a while.

Arneson: Another way it could work is if each department had the same Union contract. But that will take months.

Odit: That would help but it is a lot of interests to bring together. 

Arneson: The agreements started two years ago with Hinesburg providing police services to Richmond due to a shrinking staff in Richmond. Shortly after that agreement was in place Richmond had no officers. Shortly after the police services agreement was put in place, the Police Chief Services Agreement was agreed to which provided Police Chief Services from Hinesburg to Richmond. Most recently the Police Services Agreement was made reciprocal so Richmond officers could cover Hinesburg. 

Hill: I am cautious for several reasons of Richmond contracting with Hinesburg. One of those being the voters voted for a police department. Another being the Town Charter which references that we have a police department. The Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA) with the Union says we cannot close the department and contract for the same work. Also, loss of authority and control is a concern. In our selectboard we had a conversation about recruiting and retaining officers. Based on recent events, is it possible this group would work on how a single department would look.

Place: We keep hearing the same thing every time we have a meeting. Richmond needs to decide if Richmond wants to contract with Hinesburg. 

Odit: I think Hinesburg’s path forward for the near term is rebuilding and serving Hinesburg.

Loner: The contract has run its course. I think we stop working on a contract and if there is good will to work toward a single department we could work toward that. Right now each Town needs to focus on their individual departments. If we could get to a Union Municipal District that may work. But right now we are spinning our wheels. Trying to work with two different departments and contracts has become convoluted.

Hill: We still have the same obstacles to run through, but it would be good to know our desired destination. Then we need to figure out the medium to long term. 

Loner: Hinesburg cannot continue with the current contract. I think Hinesburg is open to agreements that allow us to have a single department in some form. But we would need a willing partner for that agreement.

Odit: In order for both Towns to get there, each town needs to address what happens in the event the two departments become one department. Currently the employees know where they work and the rules. Anything different than that is an unknown. Once we address that we have a higher likelihood of success in working together in the future. 

Loner: Wouldn’t it be easier in the short term to dissolve one department and the other town contracts for police services?

Odit: I think there are steps to take care of before we get there.

Hill: There are several choices. Go our separate ways. One town contracts with the other. A Union Municipal District with shared governance. I believe Richmond has a preference for the Union Municipal District, this would be similar to the school district. We could talk at Selectboard meetings about a contractual agreement, but I don’t think there is much appetite for that in either community. 

Loner: Richmond has been clear they do not want to pursue a contractual agreement with Hinesburg for the long term. A combination of departments seems to be what Richmond wants.

Odit: We don’t know how the officers would feel about the process to get to a Union Municipal District. There are known options for where officers can go work with more certainty. I had floated that all officers become Richmond officers and Hinesburg contracts. But I heard that Hinesburg officers like being Hinesburg officers. The most important thing is to hang onto the officers that we have.

Cohen: When we have a clear direction it will be easier to recruit people. If we move on to a Union Municipal District we will have to prove to recruits that it works. The more employees we have going into this the better start we will have. 

Place: One town having all officers for now would be a trial of a Union Municipal District. 

Loner: We have heard that this is not what Richmond wants to do.

Place: We heard in the beginning that Richmond liked having Hinesburg officers in Richmond.

Hill: It’s not outlandish that a contract could work. We’d have to see what the residents want to do. There are issues of legal and political authority. It think it would take a vote and a charter change to eliminate the department.

Brushett: If you decided to contract it would show that each town has an interest in working together and are committed to a Union Municipal District. Would Hinesburg be willing to have Richmond hold the contract for the Chief and Hinesburg hold the contract for the officers. 

Odit: I think either town providing coverage to the other town will not be possible until each town gets through their collective bargaining with the union. 

Koss: I can’t see the chief working for one town and the officers working for another. Is the goal going to be to make the union contracts the same for each department? You just need to make sure you have enough officers to cover each town. If you set up one department, you have a future there. 

Place: Could we just not hire officers in Richmond and hire more in Hinesburg?

Hill: If we could get the same CBA for each department that would help. This could be a good goal for this group.

Odit: That is complicated.

Hill: Perhaps one CBA finishes first. Then the other town could just copy it. 

Loner: That would give up one town’s ability to negotiate the contract.

Hill: No. They don’t have to accept the other contract, but they could.

Loner: But the other town would have to agree to the same contract.

Hill: That is an obstacle and creates a level of uncertainty.

Odit: The better path is to have both towns and both departments involved in the negotiations. 

Arneson: How do we proceed?

Odit: We would need to lay it out in ground rules that we can all talk to each other. 

Arneson: Perhaps everyone should be in the same negotiating room.

Cohen: What would happen to the work that Richmond and the Union have done so far?

Odit: It is up to the people involved.

Loner: I don’t see that working. There are too many competing interests, management styles, and perspectives. I think the energy should be put toward how does it work for a municipal district.

Hill: I thought having the same CBAs would be helpful but without currently working together it becomes moot. Moving forward we have two departments and work on a Union Municipal District. We would need feedback from the voters in both towns on if we want to proceed. 

Odit: For the time being both departments are going to try to re-staff and then figure out if there is a way to come together in the future. 

Hill: We need to be clear about the stakeholders it is employees and union, Selectboard, voters and charter. Last time we talked about it there was interest in a Union Municipal District. 

Sander: The reality is neither town has a full functioning department so we worked together. Public response has been good.

Hill: Paying for half a chief was seen as a financial win. 

Brushett: I think I just heard Bard and David say they think Richmond is interested in pursuing a Union Municipal District as a long term goal. If that is true, the Hinesburg Selectboard would also want to have a Union Municipal District.

Place: Most of us agree we need to start sharing between towns because we can’t get enough help. We would have to bring it back to the Selectboard to see if their will is to work toward a Union Municipal District.

Odit: We would have to ask the voters too. 

Cohen: We should try to set the expiration of the CBAs to be the same. 

Update on status of search for Interim Police Chief and discussion of how an interim chief agreement
would be structured to meet the needs of both departments in the short term and long term

Odit: This is a moot point.

Hill: We’ll need to stop the search and each town will have to pay for the work that was completed. 

Discussion of Ground Rules for the Committee

Hill: This was my suggestion. Our goals need to be the same but we also need to figure out how we organize and vote as a committee. We might be more articulate regarding the roles of selectboards needing to vote and no one selectboard member can speak for the board. 

Loner: If we are going to look at long term we could cover ground rules when we focus on that. 

Brushett: Is on the next agenda reviewing what a Union Municipal District would require?

Place: We need to see if each Town wants that.

Odit: I think it is premature to discuss until more details have been sorted out including the CBAs.

Hill: Next steps are for each Town to see if they are interested in a Union Municipal District. 

Odit: One of the steps for a Union Municipal District is a joint survey committee. It is that committee’s responsibility to see if the Town wants a Union Municipal District. I think we pause now and try to reconvene in a few months. 

Arneson: Why would we wait to determine if the Selectboards are interested in a Union Municipal District?

Odit: Then each selectboard needs to determine if they want to pursue a Union Municipal District.

Koss: We cannot have indecision. I do not see a sense of urgency to fix the problem. But you need to find out what the people want and go in that direction. Then we can build from there.

Loner: I think one of the first steps for the committee would be public engagement to see what the residents want.

Hill: I think you would need a vote. 

Items for next agenda

None.
Cohen moved to adjourn. Loner Seconded. All in favor. Meeting adjourned at 4:11pm.