MassCops - Massachusetts Law Enforcement Network, A Mass Police Web Portal

Massachusetts Law Enforcement Network

Massachusetts Police News, Information and Discussions on MassCops



Pages: 1
Main Page

Worcester PD Union

(Click here to view the original thread on the MassCops Message Board)

Posted by: Southside

This article was in the paper, I thought it may interest some due to some information regarding current layoff list, etc......

Police want money for overtime;
Union opposes grant match plan


TELEGRAM & GAZETTE (Massachusetts)
November 18, 2003 Tuesday, FINAL EDITION

- The local police union opposes the city's planned use of state community policing money to fund its match to a federal grant that will be used to hire 50 new police officers.
Instead, the union wants the community policing money used for overtime so more officers can be immediately deployed to neighborhoods where crime has been rising.

Union leaders believe the city can then use surplus money in the Police Department's salary budget to match the federal grant.

They contend there is more than $400,000 surplus in the police salary account. The city administration disagrees with that, contending that the salary account is on target for a year-end deficit of about $150,000.



Officer Richard P. Cipro, president of Local 378, International Brotherhood of Police Officers, said the union opposes using the state community policing money as the match to the federal grant because it could be more than a year before those 50 new officers join the Police Department.
Because the city will use a $3.75 million federal grant to hire new police officers, it is required by state law to first offer the positions to police officers who have been laid off in other communities throughout the state. There are 95 laid-off police officers on the state's re-employment list.

City Manager Thomas R. Hoover hopes to hire 50 police officers from that list and have them on board in March. But Officer Cipro said it is highly unlikely the city will be able to get 50 officers from the re-employment list to accept jobs here.

As a result, he said, a new recruit class would have to be planned to make up the difference, and it could be 14 months before the members of that class are selected, trained and finally put to work on the street.

''We can't afford to wait that long to meet the policing needs in some of our neighborhoods,'' Officer Cipro said in a telephone interview last night. ''There is a crying need for more police patrols in several areas like Main South, near the PIP (People In Peril) shelter, in the Piedmont area and even in Green Hill Park. People want these additional patrols and they should be provided now.

''Community policing grant money is available for us to increase patrols in those areas through overtime,'' he added. ''That is the only answer. But we won't be able to do that if the city manager is going to tie up the community policing money to help pay for these 50 new police officers. It could be months before we see some of them.''

Mr. Hoover said the cost of 50 new police officers starting in March is about $1.05 million for the balance of this fiscal year. The federal grant will pay for about $650,000 of that cost, and the city will contribute $400,000.

To help fund the city's match, Mr. Hoover said, he requested approval from the state Executive Office of Public Safety to use $300,000 of this year's community policing allocation for that purpose. He said the state approved that request.

Mr. Hoover said the balance of the state community policing money for this year will be used for foot patrols in the Vernon Hill and Green Island neighborhoods, among other things.

Officer Cipro has sent a letter to the City Council outlining his union's opposition to the city manager's plan, which will go before the council at its meeting tonight.

Officer Anthony M. Petrone, vice president of Local 378, said he cannot understand how the city administration projects the police salary account will end up with a $150,000 deficit this fiscal year.

Since the start of the fiscal year, he said, there have been 17 retirements and four other officers have been on military leave.

''What happened to the savings from these retirements and the four officers on military leave?'' Office Petrone asked. ''We have met with the city administration and asked that question, but we feel it has not been properly answered in our opinion. How can our analysis and the city administration's projection be so far off?''

In a previous report, John P. Pranckevicius, city budget director, said when the police budget was put together for this year, it already took into account savings from four expected retirements and one full-year military leave.

In addition, he said, four civilian clerks who were laid off this year have been recalled.


Posted by: RPD931

Interesting... "We don't want more cops, we want more OT"... That's the answer? unbelieveable

When something bad happens the union will then blame lack of staffing by the Administration.


Posted by: Wolfman

Hm. Do you think the people in these crime ridden areas would rather see experienced officers on the street NOW or rookies a year from now? Something bad is already happening and it's not the Union's fault.

Also it sounds like there are currently 17 openings due to retirements - why hasn't the city filled those slots with laid off officers from other towns? $150K deficit? It seems an audit of the police budget is in order, something here doesn't add up. It's really convenient to blame it on greed and walk away, but there's much more at work here. Look at the big picture.


Posted by: RPD931

MT1, I agree that it would be nice to have experienced Officers on the streets now rather than rookies 12 mos later. But it will only get worse if they don't hire more bodies, and we all know the OT sucks up the budget quick and would not make an ideal long term solution.


Posted by: ROBOCOP1982

Quote:
Hm. Do you think the people in these crime ridden areas would rather see experienced officers on the street NOW or rookies a year from now? Something bad is already happening and it's not the Union's fault.
Well, my question is what happens when the 'experienced' officers turn down the overtime? It happens. Then there is no one left to patrol the streets. Maybe the answer is temporary overtime until a class can be formed and new recruits put on the street. Just my 2cents.


Posted by: Dane

Sheriff patrols! Just kidding. Really.


Posted by: RPD931

Exactly ROBO... OT is not a solution, just a tempororay relief. Ignoring the need to put on 50 more will just create more problems. In some situations like this, it sounds like greed on behalf of the union. Do they really think that would last for years? They've got to be joking.... We all know that OT sucks up the budget and it doesn't take long until the OT starts getting turned down.


Posted by: Wolfman

to quote myself...
Quote:
...Also it sounds like there are currently 17 openings due to retirements - why hasn't the city filled those slots with laid off officers from other towns? $150K deficit? It seems an audit of the police budget is in order, something here doesn't add up. It's really convenient to blame it on greed and walk away, but there's much more at work here. Look at the big picture.
The union does not run the job, that's what management does. The union says there is a $400K surplus in the salary account. The city administration says there is a $150K deficit. You're taking a disparity here of over a half of a million dollars. Where exactly is this money?
Quote:
Since the start of the fiscal year, he said, there have been 17 retirements and four other officers have been on military leave...{snip}...In a previous report, John P. Pranckevicius, city budget director, said when the police budget was put together for this year, it already took into account savings from four expected retirements and one full-year military leave.

In addition, he said, four civilian clerks who were laid off this year have been recalled.
Why hasn't the budget director redone his calculations to take into account the additional dozen retirements and 3 officers on military leave, or is there some financial sleight-of-hand going on with the extra money?

The main budget issues need to be addressed - a deficit this size and failure to backfill for almost a dozen and a half openings can't be blamed on a greedy Union. A department the size of Worcester not being able to fill OT slots sounds farfetched but I don't work for WPD and thus am in no position to point a finger there. Any WPD people on board who would like to chime in?

Besides, I can't imagine ANY union NOT wanting to increase its membership numbers, thus increasing its bargaining power and financial base. Just curious RPD, given your enthusiasm for giving patrol slots to Sheriffs - IIRC, you said (28 Sep 2003 08:36 on the Sheriffs in New Bedford thread) that Sheriffs patrolling Brimfield would be a good thing, and a few other posts I've read here and there, are YOU a member of a union? OT is a temporary relief, and that's exactly what is needed right now, temporary relief while the budget and staffing issues are addressed. WHY IS USING OT AS A TEMPORARY RELIEF A BAD THING?

Bottom line: Regardless of funds, there is a current need for additional patrols which neither side denies. Get the current officers on the street NOW. The city adminstration aren't the ones who are out there night after night chasing calls. You fall behind in patrolling, it takes a while to catch back up and the citizens are the ones being victimized. A college campus is one thing, a real live big city is something far, far different. Pay the friggin OT and regain your visibility on the streets. Then hire what you can through the layoff lists ASAP and run a recruit class as soon as practicable.


Posted by: RPD931

My angle is simple...

If the money is sucked up to budget the OT, how will they pay for 50 new Officers?

My point about the Sheriffs in Brimfield was simply that they would be better than what they had, which was nothing. Of course I rather that ALL of the previous PO's have gotten their jobs back...but at least 5 out of 9 got their jobs back.


Posted by: Wolfman

Not only is your angle simple, your angle is also narrow.

How to pay for 50 officers? Read the article again. There is a $3.75 million federal grant to fund recruits.
Quote:
Mr. Hoover said the cost of 50 new police officers starting in March is about $1.05 million for the balance of this fiscal year. The federal grant will pay for about $650,000 of that cost, and the city will contribute $400,000.
The concern lies in the city claiming that the department is mired in a $150k deficit and has to tap CP money to fund their share of the postitions - but possibly based on flawed figures as the budget director said that he had anticipated 4 retirements when in actuality there were 17. What happened to the payroll savings for the other 13 officers who retired? Have these 17 slots been backfilled? It looks like some civilian clerks got their jobs back - was this done at the expense of the patrol force? Again, there is a difference of a half-million dollars and before you haphazardly start throwing CP dollars around you need to balance your books. Did the City Manager or Budget Director build himself a nice little beach house in the Caymans? Where exactly is the money?

There are many unanswered questions here and it isn't about cashing in on OT. Still looking for a WPD officer to come in and speak from firsthand knowledge, as all else is speculation.

Also, maybe I missed it, I'll have to reread the response - did you say you are a union member, RPD?


Posted by: Deuce

I'm on the job for Worcester and can give you my opinions and experiences. I'm definitely not all knowing and won't pretend to be because I can't bear to listen to either my "union" or Hoover too long because they both make me want to draw my weapon.....

OT to quick fix is needed right now. We need more guys on the street, now.. The savages are restless and they know we're down guys. We definitely have enough guys to fill the OT slots. But would the OT go to filling empty routes (safety issues) or to the problem areas?

Vacant slots aren't being filled because the city doesn't have the money... Wait for it... Wait for it.... Wait for it..... Bwaaa hahahah...... Just like the city didn't have the money when they laid off 20 cops.. Bullshit, they had it, Hoover laid them off to save face.... They hired them back with the clerks when a grant magically appeared after a congressman "stood up for us".......

COPS grant is being used for a recruit class. The only thing with that is the grant only pays for little more than half, and the city has to kick in the other half. Then after a year the city picks up the rest... More lay offs because the city always seems to have a deficit??

Where's the saved money going?? I can tell you where it's not... Other than that maybe Hoover can enlighten us all. I'd welcome an audit on the city books......

Damn where was I? All this talk of the city's bull got me ranting.. Did I answer any questions? OT for guys on the street right now? Damn right.. Save the money for a class of 50? Maybe 20 with the rest of the money toward OT.. After a year or so if the books ever get balanced put another 20 or so on...


Posted by: RPD931

Happily non-union... I've heard too many nightmare stories with dept. unions, I'm not really looking forward to the day I have to be part of one. I currently work for 2 Campus Dept's, both non-union. I worked as a Reserve PO before and was not subject to the union..thank god... they were like a bunch of sissy's (not all, just the union Prez and whatnot)... Christ, some guys would file a grievance if you put the toilet paper roll on backwards.

Deuce, Be safe man!! Hope you guys get what you need!


Posted by: Deuce

I often wonder more times than not what my dues are going to and what my union is doing for us. I think the union is a necessary evil though. Otherwise the city would REALLY screw us. We consistently go 1 to 2 years w/o a contract. Each negotiation the city wants to take EVERYTHING we've bargained for in the past. They want us to take the worst health insurance and pay 90% of it. Arbitrators are needed every time. In the dept, hell, favoritism and nepotism is bad enough.... Unfortunately grievences are necessary due to the amount of BF'ing.....
I can't imagine what kind of due process we'd have if someone pissed in one of our "leaders" Cheerios... But a union only has teeth when it's members have solidarity. The city knows it can screw w/ the union because we lack the afore mentioned.... More members than not are in it for themselves (payjobs) and it's just a paycheck.....


Posted by: RPD931

Duece,

Even with my less than enthusiastic desire for a union, I agree with you. The town or city would screw you even more. And yes, its only as strong as its members. But I guess I have often seen too many sissy's take advantage of it... filing grievances for any little stupid thing. But ultimately the town/city has the upper hand anyway. PO's can't walk off the job, and the downs can continue to say no over and over... I guess the "relationship" is more the key than the Unions "teeth".

But good point Deuce


Posted by: jtsmh

Quote:
Originally Posted by RPD931
Happily non-union... I've heard too many nightmare stories with dept. unions, I'm not really looking forward to the day I have to be part of one. I currently work for 2 Campus Dept's, both non-union. I worked as a Reserve PO before and was not subject to the union..thank god... they were like a bunch of sissy's (not all, just the union Prez and whatnot)... Christ, some guys would file a grievance if you put the toilet paper roll on backwards.

Deuce, Be safe man!! Hope you guys get what you need!
HAPPLIY NON-UNION, YOU OBVIOUSLY HAVE NO CLUE AS TO WHAT YOUR TALKING ABOUT. LETS SEE HOW HAPPY YOU ARE THE DAY THE CHIEFS OF YOUR CC POLICE DEPARTMENTS DECIDES THAT FOR ONE REASON OR AN OTHER THAT YOUR NOT THEIR FAVORITE PO ANY MORE, SEE YOU ON LAST HALFS. THOSE LAYOFFS THAT ARE COMING DOWN, NOT GOING TO EFFECT ANY OF HIS HIRES, HERE IS YOUR PINK SLIP. BUT I HAVE TIME ON THE JOB, SO WHAT! THAT'S THAT? NO UNION! WE DON'T CARE. AND I'LL BET IT IS JUST SO EASY TO GET A FAIR INCREASE IN YOUR WAGES WITHOUT THAT WHINING UNION PRES TO DEMAND MORE. NO ONE EVER SAID THE UNIONS WILL SOLVE ALL OUR PROBLEMS, BUT THEY SURE MAKE WORKING ONE HELL OF A LOT EASIER, AND HARDER FOR THOSE WHO CHOOSE TO SCREW US. YOU WILL NO DOUBT BENIFIT GREATLY FROM ANY UNION YOU HAVE THE PRIVILEDGE OF JOINING, REGUARDLESS OF HOW SMALL IT IS. AND AS FOR THE TIOLET PAPER BEING PLACED ON BACKWARDS, IF THERE WERE NO UNION TO OPPOSE THE IMPROPER POSITIONING OF THE ROLL, WHAT'S TO SAY THEY WOULD GIVE YOU ANY PAPER AT ALL. BUT THAN AGAIN, WHAT WOULD YOU KNOW ABOUT IT.

FROM THE FORMER MEMBER OF AN E BOARD
PROUD TO BE UNION


Posted by: RPD931

Not on a CC PD... Private - more money there. Anyway I think Deuce put it in perspective correctly.


Posted by: radiocop

Well said jtsmh. Anyone who has any time on the job (20 years for me) knows that union protection is an absoulute must. Dealing with uninformed selectmen and town administrators require us to fight with all the resources that we can muster. We are currently in negotiations, or I should say, mediation. The town feels that they were hoodwinked into agreeing to the 4&2 schedule during the last contract and of course now want to take it away. Well, it ain't gonna happen. Can you imagine if we didn't have a union? I'd have Mondays and Tuesdays off and the town would tell me I should be happy to have a job. It's a constant battle and thank god we've got what little protection we have...thanks to our union.


Posted by: BartA1

I feel that a union offers some excellent protections to its members. The dept I work full time for is union. The dept I work part time for is not union. I have gained an interesting perspective by watching how things unfold between the two. Every Union has their problems and alot of times people do not get along or see eye to eye on certain things. The one thing I have observed however is a Muncipality whether it be a city town authority or state agency, or state college if there was no union Everything would be done at the whim of the administration. Scheduling, Wages, Assignments, and Discipline. Officer A has 20 years on the job and does something the boss doesnt like and he finds himself on a different shift with the worst days off the worst assignment and a 30 day suspension. A union prevents most of that from happening and can be given an impartial place to air a grievance if needed.


Posted by: Easton

hmm union, can you say labor laws for the jobs without unions, they must show cause to do anything to you. unions are for those who dont want to do their jobs and run and hide behind the unions, nonsense. no-one wants to do anymore than they are PAID to do or they cry to the union, please. Take pride in what you do and you dont need protection from a union. They were good but now I dont see what any of them do for us. We pay dues and see nothing, go 2yrs with no contract then after 2yrs you get 2,3,1 great. Salary should be based on performance like in the real world and raises given accordingly. Hey then you would get 2 percent every year and no fight. Ha dont mind me just needed to vent. Rock on Unions!!!!!!


Posted by: sibsjr

I am on the lay off list and I received a card today from Worcester Police. They are looking to hire 50 temporary full time police officers. I do not know if these temporary positions would turn into permenant or not. The list must be signed on or before December 10.


Posted by: j809

Quote:
hmm union, can you say labor laws for the jobs without unions, they must show cause to do anything to you
Easton, you have no clue in what you are talking about. No union means you are an at will employee and yes they can do whatever they want. Unions are very important because it keeps the balance of power and keeps everyone in chekc, management and staff. Take your head out of your ass and if you don't like unions, go work at McDonalds or Wal-Mart.


Posted by: Dane

Quote:
hmm union, can you say labor laws for the jobs without unions, they must show cause to do anything to you. unions are for those who dont want to do their jobs and run and hide behind the unions, nonsense.
I don't have 35 years on my job but I know guys who do. You might want to ask someone like that what it was like to have to live in the barracks, work 108 hours a week (no OT), and get paid sh*t. That's if you got paid. If the Commonwealth was running a little short, they might just issue you a promissory note (an IOU) and tell you to suck it up. A senior Trooper in the 1970s could qualify for food stamps.

And oh yeah, transfers. In the middle of the night, you could get launched out to Nantucket. Kinda tough if you live in North Adams. In fact in the 1950s, just to make sure nobody was getting too comfortable, all of 'A' Troop was transferred to 'B' Troop and vice versa.

Quote:
Take pride in what you do and you dont need protection from a union. They were good but now I dont see what any of them do for us.
The men of the MSP took pride in what they did then, just as the men and women of the MSP take pride in their careers today. By the same token, the Commonwealth took advantage of the work ethic of Troopers then as it actively attempts to today. Feel free to ask any SPAM rep who handles bargaining or grievances. The more things change, the more they stay the same.

Quote:
Salary should be based on performance like in the real world and raises given accordingly. Hey then you would get 2 percent every year and no fight.
Easton, I guess you're not aware that average rate of inflation (which translates to the increase in your cost of living) is 3 percent. If you'd enjoy the steady downward spiral into poverty, join some non-union outfit. I don't intend this post as a slam, but you may want to investigate the union vs. non-union issue a little further.


Posted by: RPD931

Dane,

This is no longer the 50's or 70's. And Easton is right, they can't terminate you without cause. If they have a legit reason to can you without a union, they can still can you with a union. Example, last year Natick PD fired an Officer due to poor performance. That dept is union and Civil Service... he still got canned. Excellent!

Yes, the Troopers had (still have) pride when they got their Troops "swapped". Because they were dedicated cops. You are probably dedicated too. But think of the people who have the job simply for money and retirement - the ones who hide behind the union... who really don't wanna do anything... they dodge calls... hide all night... should they be protected? Should they get the same raise we do? I don't think so.

I also agree with (Easton on) the pay increase, it should be on performance not "across the board". Think about it, how many times to you see a co-worker do nothing or try to dodge calls? And he deserves a pay raise?! I don't think so. I find it an insult that they give guys a raise the same as me when they don't earn it. And a 2 or 3% raise each year is better than going without one for 2 or 3 years...

Don't get me wrong, I see the point of the union. There are jerks in the brass that would try to screw someone over. But Easton states the same point I stated, some guys try to hide behind the union, you know, the slackers... or some complain about every little thing.

But what strength does a union really have? They can't strike. And most of the time they end up having to accept what the City/Town can "afford". The union says we want X,Y,& Z.... the town says we will only give X... the union "rejects" the proposal... whoopie, you still have to work.

The use of a union? Put your dues together and hope the union retains a good Lawyer.

Don't piss the Brass off too much and you'll be fine.

Simply my opinon. I'm know everyone has a different feeling about things.


Posted by:

OK my here,

Unions are essential in todays society for the average Police Officer. With a host of people "Monday Morning Quarterbacking" your each & every move, it's good to have the union stand solidly behind you.

Look what just happened in Cincy OH. Their union president has some of the biggest balls I ever did see. Their old union boss 3 years ago during those riots has big brass ones as well.

Well having said that and being 2 1/2 years without a contract, that 0 - 2 - 4 with no language or night differential is looking real good............. NOT!

Currently we are going to arbitration but that's another year down the road. We will kick their asses this time. It's all about SOLIDARITY people. Unions ROCK!!


Posted by: LeadDog17

Quote:
Originally Posted by RPD931
Dane,

This is no longer the 50's or 70's. And Easton is right, they can't terminate you without cause. If they have a legit reason to can you without a union, they can still can you with a union.
I won't get too deep into my personal opinion on unions. Circumstance dependant, they can run anywhere from good, to necessary evil, to downright horrible. A big factor is the union brass and the relationship with the employer.

However, without a union, unless you have an employment contract, you are an EMPLOYEE AT WILL. As long as termination does not ammount to discrimination or based on a few other protections, an "Employee at Will" may be terminated at any time for any reason or no reason at all.


Posted by: Wolfman

...and bear in mind, when you are an EMPLOYEE AT WILL and Chief Huckleberry's fat bag of crap nephew is made Sergeant before you and gets the holidays off, no one will give a rat's ass. Sergeant Huckleberry doesn't like you because you beat him up once in the fourth grade. Now the shoe's on theother foot and he takes all the OT shifts for himself. His friends get the new radios and get to drive the new cruisers. You always sem to wind up on a foot patrol on rainy days. Your schedule gets changed with little to no notice. You wind up on Q5 watches and prisoner transports day after day. If you feel discriminated against, it's YOUR DIME to hire an attorney to represent you, and good labor attorneys do not come cheap...

How 'bout this - A motorist gets pissed off that she batted her eyelashes at you and you still gigged her. So she goes down to Sgt. Huckleberry (who incidentally REALLY hates your guts since the discrimination thing) and tells him that you offered to tear up the ticket for a little (WOOHOO!)...who's going to defend you? You roll around with a guy who tries to run on you and he winds up with a broken arm...who's going to defend you? You get T-boned at an intersection responding to a call. The guy that hits you (Sgt. Huckleberry's cousin) insists that you ran a red light without stopping...who's going to defend you? Your opening line will soon go from "License and registration, please." to "You want fries with that?"

I've met many former cops who sit around and bitch about how their department screwed them over and they couldn't do anything about it. Most were either complete shitbags or from a non-union department who rubbed the town fathers or management the wrong way and got railroaded out.

There's strength in numbers - in a career such as ours, you NEED to stick together because those who are at the top of the food chain will throw you to the wolves in an instant. Yes, you also protect the shitbags but sooner or later they will get themselves into an indefensible situation. I would worry less about their future and more about your own.


Posted by: tomahawk

Look what happened in Brimfield! Forget the fact that they were likely canned simply because they were trying to go union. If they were members of a union recognized by the town, it never would have been allowed to happen.

In our field, unions = good. As Eric said, overall they could suck, but a lot of different factors have to do with it. Cops need unions.

-Mike


Posted by: RPD931

Like I said:

Quote:
Don't get me wrong, I see the point of the union. There are jerks in the brass that would try to screw someone over
I know unions ARE needed. I guess my real gripe are the idiots who try to hide behind (or abuse) the union. And in a union environment even Fat Huckleberry would get a raise...is that fair?


I love sparking stuff...




ma police, boston ma police, massachusetts police, massachusetts police, mass state police, mass police, ma, mass, massachusetts, massachusetts, massachutes, massachusetts law, massachusetts polece, police, officer, police officer, cops, police gear, law enforcement, police duty gear, state police, sheriff, law, police supply, police agency directory, police agency, police department, traffic officer, police dept, state trooper, dispatcher, massachusetts county sheriff, massachusetts sheriff, massachusetts department of corrections, ma doc, doc, dept of corrections, police information, civil service, ma civil service, massachusetts crime, police training, police academy, ma police academy, massachusetts officers, masscop, masscops, mpa, bpa, ibpoa, police association, massachusetts police news, massachusetts crime news, mass most wanted, police career information, police patrol, police administration, police books, crime scene training, police discussion, crime discussions, cops

About MassCops, the home for Massachusetts law enforcement.

The Massachusetts Law Enforcement Network opened in 1998 and is now a part of the New England Police Network The site is a pro-police discussion forum intended for sworn police officers and civilian law enforcement officials as well as those interested in pursuing a career in law enforcement here in Massachusetts.

The goal of The Massachusetts Law Enforcement Network is to provide an informal network of law enforcement officials here in Massachusetts for educational and informational purposes.

The forum covers many topics such as Police Related News Articles, Agency & Profession Discussions, Police Training as well as Law Enforcement Career Information.

The Massachusetts Law Enforcement Network and The New England Police Network (NEPN) and it's network sites are privately owned websites/domains and are not affiliated with or endorsed by any government association or agency.

MassCops (masscops.com) and (masscop.com) are privately owned are not affiliated with or endorsed by the Massachusetts Coalition of Police (masscop.org)



vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Limited.
vB Easy Archive Final ©2000 - 2008 - Created by Stefan "Xenon" Kaeser

3 4 5 6 7 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 49 50 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108