After police skipped the crime lab hearing, Flynn files for a hearing on the state board's review and backs waiving the director's residency rule

A week after the Boston Police Department did not attend a council hearing on its crime lab, City Councilor Ed Flynn has filed two new items about the lab for Wednesday's council meeting (agenda). One asks for a hearing on the state Forensic Science Oversight Board's review of the lab. The other supports waiving Boston's residency requirement for the lab's director, a job the city is now advertising.

The lab tests evidence in criminal cases, including sexual assault kits. State law has required those kits to be tested within 30 days since 2018. Survivors waiting on results, and anyone whose case turns on forensic evidence, depend on how quickly and carefully the lab works.

How we got here

The Public Safety and Criminal Justice Committee heard Flynn's order on the lab's resources (docket 0180) on Oct. 26, nine months after it was filed. No one from the department came. Our Oct. 28 story covered the hearing.

At the council meeting that week, committee chair Henry Santana recommended the order stay in committee and said he would work with Flynn to schedule another hearing. Flynn said he had asked the state board to investigate the lab, and that if the state did not, he would ask the U.S. Attorney (watch at 39:24). City Councilor Erin Murphy said the administration had emailed shortly before the hearing that no one was coming.

The new hearing order

Flynn's order, docket 2100 (text), says that after the Oct. 26 hearing, lab staffing and resources came up at a meeting of the state oversight board. According to the order, the board decided to review the lab, and Boston Police would update the board later on progress since its 2025 status report.

The order also says:

• Questions remain about whether the lab has a permanent director. The former director went on paid leave in August 2022, and several people have served as interim director since.
• In 2024, the council voted for a budget amendment to move $1 million within the police budget to the lab. In 2025, police officials testified they did not know whether the money had been moved.
• The board's February 2025 status update quoted the lab as saying it had applied for a grant for equipment to do "Y-screening," a faster DNA screening method, and could not make the change without more funding, staffing and support.

The residency resolution

Flynn's resolution, docket 2107 (text), notes that the department is hiring a Director of the Forensic Lab. The resolution says applicants must live in Boston, hold at least a bachelor's degree in natural or forensic science, and have 10 years of lab experience, including three as a supervisor. The city's job posting lists pay of about $117,000 to $153,000. The resolution gives Nov. 17 as the closing date.

The resolution says members of the state board asked last week whether Boston had acted on the board's recommendation to waive the residency requirement for the job. It says the board has noted that Boston's high cost of living and competition from private labs and biotech firms make it harder to attract qualified candidates. Flynn asked the board about a waiver in February 2025, according to the board's minutes.

What our records add

The council has asked about the director before. At a May 7 Ways and Means hearing with the police commissioner, Flynn noted that the department had opted for a three-member group of directors who had worked at the lab before, and asked whether a fresh perspective had been considered (watch at 1:03:04). The lab's leadership came up again during the council's June 10 budget vote (5:44:56).

The first hearing order is still waiting. Docket 0180 has 11 sponsors and has stayed in committee since Jan. 28.

What's next

The council meets Wednesday at noon. A resolution can be adopted the same day under a suspension of the rules, unless a councilor objects. The hearing order would normally go to committee. A resolution states the council's position; on its own, it does not change the residency requirement.