Public safety committee moves proposed psychological-testing contract for police to legislative agenda

Harrisburgpublic safety committee members discussed a proposal to negotiate a professional services agreement with WCA Public Safety Assessments for psychological testing and assessment services for the Bureau of Police and advanced the matter to the next legislative session for formal consideration.

Deputy Chief Young and Commissioner Thomas Carter described the scope of services as covering pre-hire psychological evaluations and assessments for fitness-for-duty or post-incident review. "We're required, at certain stages, [in the] hiring process, to have psychological evaluations completed on anybody we hire new," Deputy Chief Young said. Commissioner Carter added the provider has long worked with the department and that the current tests are updated standards meant to reduce earlier bias in testing.

Council members asked how the tests are standardized and whether support is provided to officers who need assistance after testing. Commissioner Carter said the tests follow standards used in the region and that fitness-for-duty evaluations determine whether an officer can return to field duties. "The pre hire test is prescribed by the Police Chiefs Association. We have to use the one that they dictate," Carter said.

Public comment during the meeting raised an adjacent concern about cooperation with federal immigration enforcement. Brandon Mason spoke during public comment requesting a city policy to prohibit Harrisburg police from assisting U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) operations in the city. Commissioner Carter responded that "we have no control over the Federal Government. We have no control over ICE," and said he was not aware of the department having teamed with ICE to extract people from homes, though he acknowledged ICE had been active in the city. Councilman Jones said he does not support police cooperation with ICE and that he would consult legal staff about options to put a stance on paper.

Committee members moved Resolution 6 to the councillegislative agenda for a formal vote; the work session did not include a final vote on the contract authorization.

The committee advanced the negotiation authorization for formal action at the next legislative session; the city did not finalize any contract at the work session.