less than $1,000,000 shall be expended to Inspirational Ones, Inc. to reinvest in the 416 community by continuing development of the Methuen youth innovation project in collaboration 20 of 50 417 with Methuen public schools, including, but not limited to, the securing of a physical facility, the 418 creation and implementation of a curriculum model for the purpose of identifying and expanding 419 deeper learning opportunities for the youth of the city

less than $1,000,000 shall be expended to Inspirational Ones, Inc. to reinvest in the 416 community by continuing development of the Methuen youth innovation project in collaboration 20 of 50 417 with Methuen public schools, including, but not limited to, the securing of a physical facility, the 418 creation and implementation of a curriculum model for the purpose of identifying and expanding 419 deeper learning opportunities for the youth of the city

City of Methuen, 22 MCSR 504 (2009) (employee had been properly qualified for appointed to permanent position under ConTest although city erroneously failed to document it at the time) 30 for extraordinary retroactive relief at the expense of the employment rights of other civil service employees, and no good cause has been shown to make an exception in this case. See, e.g., Mulligan v.

City of Methuen, 20 MCSR 215 (2007) (failure to disclose prior charge); Tracy v. Cambridge Police Dept, 18 MCSR 221 (2005) (multiple charges exhibits patterns of behavior); Thames v. Boston Police Dept, bypass based on pending charges, but bypass 17 MCSR 125 (2004) (improper to upheld based on long history of arrests and applicants own testimony); Soares v.

Bowers, Esq.1 Manzi, Bonanno & Bowers 280 Merrimack Street, Suite B Methuen, MA 01844 Appearance for Respondent: Wendy Chu, Esq. Jennifer King, Esq. Deutsch Williams Brooks DeRensis & Holland, P.C. One Design Center Place, Suite 600 Boston, MA 02210 Commissioner: Cynthia Ittleman DECISION Mr. Ronaldo Medeiros (Appellant or Mr.

City of Methuen, 28 MCSR 345 (2015); Morris v. Braintree Police Dept, 27 MCSR 656 (2014); Monagle v. City of Medford, 23 MCSR 267 (2010); Mainini v. Town of Whitman, 20 MCSR 647, 651 (2007); Belanger v. Town of Ludlow, 20 MCSR 285 (2007); Horvath v. Town of Pembroke, 18 MSCR 212 (2005); Fairbanks v. Town of Oxford, 18 MCSR 167 (2005); Saborin v.Town of Natick, 18 MCSR 79 (2005); Sihpol v. Beverly Fire Dept, 12 MCSR 72 (1999); Bannish v.

City of Methuen, 20 MCSR (failure to disclose prior charge), Tracy v. Cambridge Police Dept, or other 215 (2007) 18 MCSR 221 (2005) (multiple charges exhibits patterns of behavior); Thames v. Boston Police Dept, 17 MCSR 125 (2004) (improper to bypass based on pending charges, but bypass upheld based on long history of arrests and applicants own testimony), Soares v.

203509 HYDE PARKMA 222911 MALDEN MA 205271 CHELSEA MA 243687 BRADFORDMA 206356 CHELSEA MA 138499 LYNN MA 202563 SOMERVILLMA 129201 MALDEN MA 105125 EVERETT MA 79345 ROXBURY MA 235204 ROCHESTENH 167319 MALDEN MA 27045 EVERETT MA 178861 MALDEN MA 129612 187253 BOSTON MA 202366 EVERETT MA 113731 MALDEN MA 123221 SOMERVILLMA 169027 EVERETT MA 182836 MALDEN MA 203294 MALDEN MA 117677 EVERETT MA 162504 CHELSEA MA 28362 EVERETT MA 156573 MEDFORD MA 185178 METHUEN

City of Methuen, 28 MCSR 345 (2015); Morris v. Braintree Police Dept, 27 MCSR 656 (2014). While it is not the Commissions role to rate the candidates interview performance, I do need to determine whether the preponderance of 31 the evidence supports the Respondents conclusion that the Appellant had a markedly poor interview, which the Respondent used in part as the basis for bypassing him for promotion.

See Methuen Police Superior Officers Association and City of Methuen, No. 01-19-0001-3281, p. 31 (Loretta Attardo, 2022) (holding fact that no funds were appropriated for increases claimed by the Union supported conclusion that the City did not violate the parties agreement). To hold otherwise, would allow a Union to lay in wait and change the meaning of a contract whenever new leadership took over.

Fairburn & McQuillan 240 Pleasant Street Methuen, MA 01844 Commissioner: Cynthia A. Ittleman DECISION On July 21, 2016, the Appellant, David Chartrand (Mr. Chartrand or Appellant), pursuant to G.L. c. 31, s. 43, filed a timely appeal with the Civil Service Commission (Commission), contesting the decision of the Town of Dracut (Town or Respondent) to suspend him for ten (10) days.