Joliet Board of Fire and Police Commissioners Special Meeting – June 30, 2026

The City of Joliet Board of Fire and Police Commissioners held a special meeting on Tuesday, June 30, 2026, at 2:00 PM in the Council Chambers at City Hall. All five commissioners were present (Chairman Quinn Adamowski, Natalie Coleman, Tomas Ponce, John Stefanski, Pat Strocchia), along with Deputy Director of Human Resources Gina LoGalbo, Police Deputy Chief Sherrie Blackburn, and Fire Deputy Chiefs Matt Baxter and John Stachelski. The meeting addressed a police promotion and a discussion on the calculation of veterans’ preference points for promotional processes.

Public Comments & Testimony

• Eric Mattson, President of the Fire Officers Association Local 2369, addressed the commissioners regarding rules on veterans’ preference points. He asked the board to consider not establishing new rules while a current promotional list is in progress, and to complete the existing list before discussing any changes.

Discussion Items

• Joliet Police Department Promotion – Sergeant: Deputy Chief Sherrie Blackburn presented a review of Master Patrol Officer James Durham’s work history, noting that he had received numerous awards (including a Silver Life Saving Award and Illinois Juvenile Officers Association Distinguished Service Award) and had no disciplinary record for the past five years. She recommended his promotion to sergeant.
• Discussion Regarding Promotional Preference Points (TMP-10035):
  • Attorney Kelly Coyle provided a legal overview, explaining that the current board rules reference Illinois state statute (65 ILCS 5/10-2.1.1) for veterans’ preference points. She stated that, under the statute and case law, promotion points require both an honorable discharge and current inactive or reserve duty status (the “and” interpretation). However, the city’s historical practice had been to award points on an “or” basis (either honorable discharge or current reserve status).
  • Deputy Director Gina LoGalbo read a statement requesting the board’s guidance on eligibility criteria and documentation standards. She presented two options for qualifying military service: (1) award points for every 365 days of active military service (active or reserve) OR (2) only if the veteran has served in both active and reserve/inactive status. She also asked about documentation—whether to rely only on DD-214s or to also accept other forms such as point credit summaries or leave and earnings statements.
  • Commissioner Pat Strocchia expressed concern about changing rules mid-cycle, noting that candidates had prepared for the current list under the existing “or” interpretation. Commissioner Natalie Coleman agreed that the current list should be finalized as is.
  • A lengthy debate ensued: several board members emphasized the importance of consistency and fairness to veterans who had planned their careers based on the existing method. Commissioner Coleman noted that the city is a home-rule community and can choose to follow a different interpretation. Attorney Coyle clarified that the board could amend its rules to codify the “or” approach, but that any change should be done after the current list is certified.
  • On documentation, Commissioner Strocchia preferred to accept only DD-214s, citing concerns about forgery and the need to verify honorable discharge. Others were open to accepting additional documents (e.g., point credit summaries, leave and earnings statements) after further review, especially if they could confirm the type of discharge. The board did not reach a final decision on documentation but indicated they would continue using the current practice until a future rule amendment.

Key Outcomes

• Promotion of James Durham: The board unanimously approved the promotion of Master Patrol Officer James Durham to Sergeant. (Motion by Tomas Ponce, seconded by John Stefanski; all commissioners voted aye.)
• Direction on Veterans’ Preference Points: The board directed Human Resources to continue calculating veterans’ preference points for the current promotional cycle using the existing “or” interpretation (option one), i.e., awarding points if the candidate meets either the honorable discharge requirement or the current inactive/reserve duty requirement. No formal rule change was made, but the board will consider amending its rules in the future to codify this practice.
• Documentation Standards: The board agreed to maintain the current practice of accepting DD-214s as the primary proof of service. They will explore the possibility of accepting additional documents (point credit summaries, leave and earnings statements) at a later date, after verifying that these documents can confirm the character of discharge. The board did not change the documentation requirement for the current list.