Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Governance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission discusses shifting from Greenwood ordinance to state statute for merit commission
Summary
Commissioners discussed the possibility of moving governance of the merit commission from Greenwood’s ordinance to the state statute, raising questions about reappointments, term staggering, hearing timelines and measures to preserve the board's neutrality.
Commissioners discussed whether the Greenwood Police Merit Commission should operate under the state statute rather than the current city ordinance. Chief of Police James Eichten raised the topic, saying the ordinance and state statute conflict in some areas and that many departments now operate under statute. “The majority of police and fire departments in the state are operating under the statute and not an ordinance,” the chief said.
The chief and other participants noted several implications if the commission adopts the statute: current members would likely have to be reappointed, appointment allocations between the council and the mayor could change, and procedural timelines for termination and hearings would shorten under statute (the chief described a 10-day statutory response window for certain actions). Commissioners emphasized preserving the commission’s neutrality and avoiding any return to patronage or favoritism. One participant summarized the original rationale for the Greenwood ordinance as removing favoritism: “the whole purpose of establishing the police merit commission was to get rid of favoritism or nepotism,” a speaker said.
Nut graf: The discussion was exploratory: commissioners asked city legal to compare language, weigh the effects on appointment mechanics and due-process timelines, and consider whether to draft conforming ordinance updates or proceed toward statute adoption. An attorney or commission member volunteered to review the statute text and circulate it to the commissioners for study.
The commission agreed to arrange meetings with city legal, the mayor’s office and other stakeholders to map potential next steps. No binding decision to change governance was made; commissioners asked staff and counsel to prepare a comparison of ordinance language and statutory requirements for a future meeting.
What’s next: An attorney or designated reviewer will circulate the state statute language for commissioners to review, and the commission will schedule a working session to discuss findings and recommendations.
