HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Committees - Civil Services Commission - 09/26/2001 (3) . City of Kent- Civil Service Commission
September 26, 2001 Meeting Minutes
Members Present: Callius Zaratkiewicz
Ron Banister
Tim Gimenez
Others Present: Asst. C/A Brett Vinson, Jed Aldridge, C/A Roger Lubovich, Chief
Crawford, Lt. Steve Ohlde, Lt. Lorna Rufener, Lillian Hernandez, Dep.
Chief Miller, Lt. Glenn Woods, others present.
Chair Zaratkiewicz called the meeting to order for the September 261h Civil
Service meeting at 5:15 p.m. (118)
Chair asked all those in attendance to stand and have a moment of silence in
remembrance of everybody that was affected by the September 11'h terrorist
attacks.
I. COMMISSION BUSINESS:
• II. HEARING:
1. Appeal of Justin Poe, Entry Level Police and Entry Level Corrections
Officer Candidate regarding his removal from the two Eligibility
Lists.
Chair: Ok. Thank you. Ok being that I think we have everybody here at this time
we're gonna move back up. And hearings, appeal of Justin Poe entry level police and
entry level corrections officer candidate regarding his removal from the two
eligibility lists. So at this time I think that we should move into the hearing.
And...do we, how do we want to situate.
Jed: Jed Aldridge, E.S., we need to be able to record this then. And so if he would
sit in the front seat or use the the remote mic or use the podium...
Chair: Ok. (talking over each other 573) Make sure...is that on?
Working to get the microphone working properly (577)
Brett: Also for the Commission, I have uh provided the commission a copy of uh the
• hearings procedures that that outlines the the steps that will be involved. (Brett
explains the process to all participants? Talking to quietly to tell for sure 588-670)
• Civil Service Commission Meeting
September 26, 2001
Page 2
Chair: We'll move right into the opening statements. You're up...
D;y"
Bruce"Good afternoon members of the commission. I am Bruce Disend$acting as
special council to the City. I'll be representing the City this afternoon. And rather
than making the traditional opening statement, I would like to raise a an issue
concerning the uh jurisdiction of the commission to hear this matter. It is my
understanding uh that Mr. Poe has filed an appeal with regard to his placement upon
the eligibility register for Corrections Officer. It is my further understanding
that the particular uh eligibility list in question has since expired so that if the
commission were to grant relief, relief would be to place Mr. Poe upon a list that no
longer is in existence.
That being the case, uh it appears that this issue, that this appeal is now moot. So,
preliminarily, I would move to dismiss the appeal upon that basis."
• Discussion between members of the Commission (712)
Chair: At this time the the commissioners and myself feel that if there is a
problem with the testing process that we would like to know what it is. So we would
like to go ahead with the appeal and hopefully if there is an identifiable problem
that we could head it off in the future and not have to repeat this. So we're going
to go ahead with the appeal, even though, as you've stated, there isn't a remedy as
of yet or that we're even aware of but we do want to see if we do have to change
something in the testing process. So, we want to allow him to say his peace.
Bruce: I certainly have no objection to that.
Chair: Ok.
Bruce: Uh, I have no further statement in light of your comments.
Chair: Ok.
Justin Poe: "Uh, good evening, my name is Justin Poe and I was recently a candidate
for the Police and Corrections Officers list for the City of Kent. Um, I just want
• to start off first of all and say that uh I have no bad feelings toward your
department, at all, I my intention is not to sue but rather explain why I feel like I
• Civil Service Commission Meeting
September 26, 2001
Page 3
should be reinstated on the Police and Corrections List. Um, my goal in life was, and
has always been, since I can remember to be a Police or Corrections officer and uh
during the testing phase I was doing great with the written, physical, the oral
board, and I uh had a psych evaluation and there was questions raised in the psych
evaluation on whether I could do the job as a Police or Corrections officer. Uh, I'm
here to uh present my case today to you folks um because I believe that I'm
qualified to do the job as either Police or Corrections officer. I have brought 4
people that uh are very, I've I've known for awhile, that, two of them I work with,
which are Jim Blair and Jimmy Matthews. And I've also brought my two, uh, one of
them being my Administration of Justice instructor at Highline College and my
athletic academic supervisor Margo Buchan to uh testify on my behalf. Speak on
my behalf.
Bruce: Members of the commission I I realize this, this, you're not a judicial body
although you're serving in that capacity today and I don't want to make these these
proceedings unduly legalistic uh and please head me off if I'm going down the wrong
• path. My understanding from the appeal that Mr. Poe filed is that it is addressed
to the psychological uh testing that was done. Uh, and as for as I am aware from
reviewing the City's files, although their aspects of of Mr. Poe's testing were done
quite well. Given that case, would it be worthwhile for the Commission to hear what
appears to be a rather broadbosed uh testimony on behalf of Mr. Poe on issues that
perhaps aren't even in dispute? But rather focus on the psychological testing
aspect of his uh participation in the examination?
Chair: I'm gonna say that we would prefer that we stay on whatever the issue is,
whatever the flaw in the testing process is.
Somebody whispers "do you have those scores?" (832)
Justin Poe: "Hmmm Hmmm, yes I do" (833)
Commissioner: That would be our primary concern, and those would be the issues
that we would be dealing with at whatever outcome the hearing has.
Darrell Wells: I don't think that we'd have objections on that, but one of the things,
I don't as a board whether or not you have seen the scores that Justin..
• Brett: Sir I'm sorry to interrupt but if you could, these proceedings are being
recorded if you could just state your name.
• Civil Service Commission Meeting
September 26, 2001
Page 4
Darrell Wells: Ok. My name is Darrell Wells. Um, we do have copies here that I'd
just like to provide you with. This particular one is Entry Level Corrections Officer
examination. He has both a written score of 74% , an oral interview score of 81%
on there. His total score averaged out to be 78%. Let's see...Ok, we also have...
Chair: Would this be...(voice trails off as he asks Brett a question 871)
Darrell Wells: Justin tested both far Corrections and Police level officer/entry.
On the Police officer score he had a written test of 82% and he had an oral
interview score of 100%. He had a final score, after weighing the veteran's
preference, was applicable (unintelligible 883) to a 100%. Now the total part of
this hearing then ledges back on he had passed all of these tests, goes back to his
psychological evaluation on that. What Justin got from the the City, (right here
903) he received a letter "This letter is to notify you that you will no longer be
considered for employment with this agency, Police and Corrections, due to your
failure of the psychological portion of this selection process." But there is nothing
• relating him to this to tell him how that psychological process actually went, what
he actually scored on it, or why it actually turned him down in the process. So I
understand we have Dr. Ekemo right here right now and maybe he can enlight on
that and then we would like to come back and present our case as to Justin's ability
to become either a Police Officer or a Corrections Officer.
Chair: Ok, then this is tied in with a testing process problem.
Darrell Wells: It's tied in with a testing process yes, but we have two of uh Justin's
um college professors here that can will testify as to his abilities on that.
Chair: Ok great. Are these character reference or are...See we have a focus on
what we are working with. The test, our tests that are certified, you know, by the
state and so on and so forth. Now if there is a problem with the test I want to go
and fix it.
D Wells: I'm not privy to the test. So I don't know on that so I have no idea...
Chair: I guess another question that I have too is are you entering these in as
evidence at this time?
•
• Civil Service Commission Meeting
September 26, 2001
Page 5
Wells: I do not know. You can call it evidence if you want. I do not know if you had
ever seen those test scores.
Discussion between Commission and Brett (965).
Brett: Mark one and then identify it for the record as exhibit A and then mark the
other one...
Chair: Let's just make sure that we have them all so that...Ok, do we have, we have
two copies here. Is that correct?
D. Wells: Copies of Police and copies of the Corrections.
Chair: Ok.
Wells: Relating to his test scores prior to psychological exam.
Tests are entered in as Exhibit A and Exhibit B.
Brett Vinson: I have as exhibit A the Entry level Corrections Officer examination
letter dated March 141h addressed to Justin Poe. And as exhibit B I have the
Entry level Police Officers letter dated March 2. (unintelligible 1000)
Wells: Ok, now you want to keep this in light of the psychological exam portion of
it?
Chair: Well the challenge...My understanding is the challenge that is being made is
on the psychological exam.
Wells: That is the basis of the challenge, yes.
Chair: Ok, that there was a flaw in the system and that Justin would have scored
higher if the test had been more accurate. That's what my understanding is.
(Two males confirm that that is their mutual understanding (1020))
Bruce: Could could I ask the commissioners what that understanding is based upon?
• The indication that I have in the record is Mr. Poe's letter of April 291h of this year
• Civil Service Commission Meeting
September 26, 2001
Page 6
to Mr. Jed Aldridge which in the second paragraph quote "I am requesting an appeal
because I feel the psychological evaluation may have been slighted." Uh, is there
any other documentation concerning the appeal that the commission is privy to that
I'm not aware of?
Chair: Do we have any other documentation as far as the testing process is
concerned?
(mumbling 1048- 1062)
Wells: Since Dr. Ekemo did the psychological exam, can he address this as to the
specifics?
Bruce: At this joint I'm just trying to determine what the scope of the appeal is
and the commissioner indicated an understanding of what the appeal involved, I'm
just trying to determine what that's based upon: documentation or statements...
• Chair: Our understanding, my understanding, from the letter that we received was
that there was concern over the testing process and whether or not it was a clear
and accurate evaluation. Before we move to the Dr., Jed, could you give us an
overview of the testing and how the tests relate to other tests as for as when they
set up a testing process?
Jed: For Police Officer?
Chair: Yeah. And how they relate like City of Tacoma, City of Seattle...
Jed: Jed Aldridge, Employment Manager, typically there is a series of events
during an entry level testing process for Police Officer uh throughout the state.
And that may or may not include a written examination, may or may not include a
physical agility examination, may or may not include uh some video testing, uh may
or may not include an oral interview/or what's commonly referred to as an oral
board. Um, and then from there a list is established and a a conditional offer of
employment is made based of the successful passage of the psychological and
physical examination by a psychologist and a physician. Um, and then uh there's a
final Chief's interview um and maybe even perhaps a follow-up interview that takes
• place. It's a it's a multiple step process that that people go through.
• Civil Service Commission Meeting
September 26, 2001
Page 7
Excuse me, before you leave I can you give me some additional information about
the process of the psychological screening if that would be helpful. Um...
Chair: Would you state your name (unintelligible 1140) talking about,whether
witness is coming across clearly.
Dr. Bill Ekemo: Um, my name is Dr. Bill Ekemo, I'm a licensed psychologist in
Washington state which means you need to complete an accredited program of
study through a regionally um credited school or university. I'm a graduate of
California School of Professional Psychology. Um, I had clinical emphasis in my
training in neuropsychology and then did a 2 yr. Post doc. Fellowship of law
enforcement psychology and clinical neuropsychology in private practice. And um,
I've probably conducted in the last six yrs. About somewhere in the'area of 4500-
5000 evaluations for public safety officers- that includes corrections, fire
fighters, police, and police officers. I also worked for appx. 10 yr$. For the state
of Alaska as a corrections officer in juvenile custody. (Unintelligible 1169) That's
• my background and training with respect to doing these. Um, my supervisor and
mentor for a number of years is Dr. David Smith who is one of the chairpersons for
the um Washington Assoc. of Police Chiefs and Sheriffs in establishing a criteria
for which uh applicants would be screened for a Police Officer/ Public Safety
position. That that, those criteria was developed in 1991. I got kind of a dry
throat today. But um basically um, there is some requirements that there will be a
minimum of two psychological type screening um instruments used that assess for
personality characteristics and traits, and what we call sort of goodness-for-fit for
uh this type of work. In addition to that we would use um an instrument that would
tap or uh test one's intellect and capacity to reason and make judgements and
decisions in a short amount of time. Granted, those are paper and pencil tests.
One must read fairly quickly and make some decisions about answering and
responding to questions in a said manner. We take a look at all of those um tests in
conjunction with clinical interview that would probably be anywhere from 45 mins.
To an hour and a half in length in which we're looking at um an applicant's history,
family history, work history, and any pertinent information related to integrity
issues, background, judgement, decision making type of information that we would
acquire from the scope of the evaluation. And we put all of that together and
simply try to integrate it into a report and provide a rating system to the agency
that might rank a candidate based on whether we consider them to be an excellent
• or outstanding candidate, above average, average, below average,,or um possibly um
at some liability risk to the agency for problems in either at completing the
• Civil Service Commission Meeting
September 26, 2001
Page 8
Academy or having failures on the job. Does that answer or are there questions
about...I can briefly touch on the areas that we look for and that we examine based
on the criteria developed by the Washington Assoc. of Police Chiefs and Sheriffs.
And I also realize that really um there's probably a very small group of us within
the State that do these types of evaluations on a day-in and day-out basis. Um, and
I don't know what that number is but I would guess it's somewhere between not
more than probably about 10 folks in the State; ten or twelve folks who do this on a
regular basis. Our office uh probably works for approximately 60 different law
enforcement agencies, 8 sheriff's departments, and State of Washington um Dept.
of Corrections as well.
Brett: Before going into, uh it appears that Dr. Ekemo is going to be testifying
about the different areas that he's usually tested. That would probably be uh
better served in...We're still kinds in the opening statements of things.
Dr. Ekemo: That sort of lays the parameters a little bit at least.
• Brett: Also, if as a point of clarification, uh and to assist um the Commission in uh
focusing uh this appeal...Justin had hired an Attorney, Ms. Karol Whealdon, at the
beginning of uh this process. And Ms. Whealdon's uh involvement in this matter
centered around one issue and the issue was getting a copy of the psychological
exam and the raw data that was taken in order to comply, or to uh compile that
psychological exam to a Dr. Green who is an individual who um is, I don't know if he's
a psychologist or a psychiatrist, but essentially what Justin and had asked through
his attorney was that we give the raw data and uh psychological exam to another
psychologist to review to determine if the testing procedure was flowed or if the
uh results were in some way skewed. I sent a letter on July 101h, to Dr. Ekemo
advising uh that he release and forward a copy of the psychological exam and raw
data to um Dr. Green. I'd spoke with Ms., Ms. Whealdon and uh on August 10'h she
advised me that she was withdrawing because her um involvement in the matter had
ceased and that Dr. Green was reviewing the documents and and the raw data. I
haven't heard anything else from uh Justin Poe or Karol Whealdon with reference
to the documents that we uh sent to Dr. Green.
Poe: May I ask you folks?
• Chair: Sure.
. Civil Service Commission Meeting
September 26, 2001
Page 9
Poe: Ok. Uh, actually I was working with Karol originally through this matter just to
help get me started. Um, I decided it would not, it wouldn't be in my best interest
to do anything with an Attorney. Like I said, I'm not here for any bad reasons and
I figured an attorney would present that. Uh, I left Karol out of it, I wanted to go
in and really just present uh my case. I went in to Dr. Allen Green in 1993 shortly
before I entered Highline Community College and, uh, he helped me, he re-evaluated
me in this process um , excuse me, to help get me started uh to see if there was any
flaws in ,eh, in the testing process. Uh, right now I am working with uh little
information with results that I have here of why I got taken off the Police and
Corrections lists. There were no reasons uh given why. Um, now the reason why I I
would like some answers today is just merely because of my testing scores. Um, I I
just maybe want to know why that way I can state my case, um, a little bit better.
Chair: Are we pretty much through the opening statements?
Bruce: If I might follow-up on Mr. Poe's statement because I, it's clear to me that
• the Commission is interested in assuring the process is legitimate, valid one that
selects applicants appropriately. And we're focusing on the psychological aspects of
it. Dr. Ekemo who who administered the test obviously is available to receive
questions you may have and if necessary he can be called as a witness either by Mr.
Poe or myself. In light of the fact that his findings were shared with with Dr.
Green, I'm wondering whether it might be in the interest of efficiency of this
hearing, uh it might be worthwhile for the Commission to inquire whether Dr. Green
will be available whether he has any issues with regard to the particular testing. If
not, um we may be drawing the hearing to a conclusion shortly, if he does than
certainly we want to learn about that as well. So perhaps Mr., with the
Commission's permission, Mr. Poe will Dr. Green be here?
Poe: No, no he won't today.
Ekemo: We're interested to comment with respect to this is that, um when
applicants complete an instruction process in our office it does state at the bottom
here that is says "the department paid for and owns the summary report. Its
inquiries regarding results should be directed to the department where detailed
information regarding specific test findings is available from the psychologist at
the expense of the applicants and in concurrence with the department". It's not
• unusual for a couple of times a year in our office to have someone call us and ask if
they can have for feedback and discuss the results of the examination. Justin did
Civil Service Commission Meeting
September 26, 2001
Page 10
not do that though he could have contacted the department and asked for their
permission. They own the evaluation, they are our client in these circumstances.
We've never had a department refuse to provide or to allow an applicant to receive
that type of information in those circumstances. We charge a nominal fee and I'd
be happy to sit down and go over the evaluation and explain the results and the
reasons for the decisions that I've rendered. But that was not done;in this case.
Chair: Ok, uh....
Conversation/ whispering taking place on the side (1500)
Bruce: I was just talking to Mr. Poe and asked whether he would be interested in
taking advantage of that opportunity and he indicated he would. I said, well in light
of that fact, if you wish to do that, uh it might be of assistance although it would
result in some degree of delay, perhaps to continue the hearing so that Mr. Poe
would have the opportunity to meet with Dr. Ekemo. His questions may resolve this
• matter in his mind. If they do not, then perhaps, we certainly can reconvene the
Commission's hearing. But at this juncture, it is unclear to me that there is a flaw
in the testing process. I understand Mr. Poe's inquiry to be more in the nature of
just wanting to understand why he received the evaluation that he did. Perhaps the
Commission's time might be best spent deferring any action until such time as Mr.
Poe has the opportunity to meet with the Dr.
Chair: Is that your desire at this time is to meet with the Dr.?
Justin: Yes, Sir, it is.
Chair: Ok. Well then at this point what we're going to do is we're going to defer
any further action until Mr. Poe makes contact with the Dr. and then at which point,
if we need to go back to the appeal process again we'll re-enter and reschedule. At
this time...
Brett: Just as a uh point of clarification, I wouldn't advise the Commission to have
kind of an open time period to allow that to happen. Or an open time period uh in
which to allow uh Mr. Poe to schedule an appeal.
Chair: How much time would we need to make this happen effectively?
i
• Civil Service Commission Meeting
September 26, 2001
Page 11
Bruce: Dr. Ekemo are you fairly available to meet?
Ekemo: Yeah, fairly available. Really all the person needs to do, as long as it's ok
with the department, is call our office and schedule an appointment with me. I
don't have my schedule book with me so I couldn't say for sure what my availability
is but I would certainly say that to go over the results and talk...I never know how
long that's going to take. I might meet with an applicant for half an hour, I might
meet with them for an hour or two hours. My job I think when they come is to
provide as much useful information to them as possible and to give them some
guidance if that's what they ask for. If that takes two hours, then it takes two
hours. But he could certainly call and schedule an appointment and I would suspect
that I have sometime next week but I couldn't say for sure when.
Justin: My understanding is to call Dr. Ekemo's office and schedule an appointment
with him directly.
• Does it have to be coordinated...through the City?
Chuck Miller: Deputy Police Chief, is a verbal authorization sufficient for you?
Dr. Ekemo: Absolutely.
Chuck Miller: You got it.
(laughter)
Chair: What we'll do, at this time we'll continue the hearing until the next meeting.
There was some discussion (1632) as to how Justin Poe would be informed of the
next Civil Service Commission meeting. It was decided that a letter would be sent
on behalf of the Commission notifying Mr. Poe of the date and time of the next
meeting when the continuation of his appeal would take place. (October 241h, 5:15
P.M.)
J. Poe: Real quick if I may say something. Uh, I just right now want to thank you
folks for your time.
• Chair: Ok, motion seconded, all those is favor say 'aye'.
• Civil Service Commission Meeting
September 26, 2001
Page 12
'AYE'
Chair: Ok, motion passes. Ok, is there any other business to come before the
Commission at this time?
III. OLD BUSINESS:
A. Accept Into Record:
1. Chair moved to approve the minutes of the meeting from August 22nd,
2001 Civil Service Meeting. Motion seconded and carried.
IV. NEW BUSINESS:
A. Accept Into Record
• Chair: Is there anybody that would like to review any of the topics 1-7 and
accept into record? Seeing none, I'm going to make a motion that we accept
item 1-7 into record.
Motion to accept items 1-7. Lt. Woods addressed the Commission in regard
to Item #1.
1. Certification letter dated September 13, 2001 from Chief Examiner
Winecka establishing the Police Captain Eligibility List,
2. Certification letter dated September 14, 2001 from Chief Examiner
Winecka establishing the Entry Level Correction Officer Eligibility
List.
3. Letter dated August 16, 2001 from Chief Crawford to Thomas
Burnside congratulating him on being hired as a probationary Police
Officer for the City of Kent Police Department, effective September
16, 2001.
4. Letter dated August 23, 2001 from Chief Crawford to Gregory
• Richards congratulating him on being hired as Probationary Police
• Civil Service Commission Meeting
September 26, 2001
Page 13
Officer for the City of Kent Police Department, effective September
18, 2001,
5. Resignation letter from Trisha King-Stargel received from the Police
Department August 22nd effective September 5, 2001.
6. Resignation letter from Dean Lindberg dated August 16'h received
from the Police Department with an effective date of September 4,
2001.
7. Resignation letter from Kenneth Martin received from the Police
Department September 201h effective September 4, 2001.
Lt. Woods: Mr. Chair? I do have one. Item number 1. On the certification, uh let
me identify myself first. I'm Glenn Woods. I'm a It. With the, uh, Police dept. I'm
• here representing, uh, 4 other police, uh, police Its. I know this is just a movement
to accept in to record the certification/ or the establishing of the Police Captain
eligibility list. Just want to, uh, make you aware that at approximately 4:10 this
afternoon a letter of appeal was filed with the Chief Examiner's Office appealing
the Promotional exam on behalf of, uh, five of the candidates.
Commission chair: Okay. So then what we'll do is, we will
Brett: We'll move this into the next meeting (unintelligible 183- mumbling and
talking hushedly). Allow it to be addressed separate from the remaining seven
items.
Chair: What we'll do with this is we will, at the present time, we'll approve 2-7. So
I'll withdraw the first motion .
Jed: Point of clarification, um, the eligibility list is4eaay established when the
Chief Examiner certifies that, uh, the day that all the test scores are in. There's
an appeal period within 10 days of that. Uh, I understand, uh, Lt. Woods', uh,
concern is that he just wants to make you aware of that issue.
Chair: Is it critical that we have to respond on that item right now? Or can we
• hold?
I
• Civil Service Commission Meeting
September 26, 2001
Page 14
Lubovich: The list is already established by by the Examiner. I would, suggest/my
suggestion was to remove that and discuss and just lump that with the issue of the
petitions filed. And appeal that at that time.
Chair: Okay.
Lubovich: That would be (unitelligible 216)
Chair: We will, we will return to item #1 when we get to the discussion of the
appeal. How's that? So for right now I make a motion that we accept items 2-7
into record. Motion is seconded and passes.
B. Action Items for Discussion
Chair: Okay, moving right along. We have action items. Items 1, 2,
• and 4 belong to acting Chief Hamilton. Would you like to discuss
items 1, 2, and 4? Action items for discussion...no response (244).
Memo dated August 171h, 2001 from A/C Hamilton notifying his
authorization...
1. Memo dated August 17, 2001 from A/C Hamilton notifying this office
of the appointment of Mike Scott to Provisional Assistant Chief
effective July 1, 2001.
2. Memo dated August 17, 2001 from A/C Hamilton notifying this office
of the appointment of Brian Kruml to Provisional Battalion Chief
effective July 1, 2001.
4. Memo dated September 10, 2001 from A/C Hamilton in regard to the
appointment of Jon Napier to Provisional Battalion;Chief as well as
Tom Shepard to Provisional Assistant Chief.
Jed: These are notifications of of provisional appointments notifying Civil Service
of the trickle down effect since Chief Angelo has left and gone to, El Segundo. Uh,
the fire department has found it necessary to make a provisional uh Fire Chief,
• provisional A/C, provisional Battalion Chief, provisional Lts. It's a trickledown
effect of that and these are uh memos from um the interim Fire Chief to the Civil
• Civil Service Commission Meeting
September 26, 2001
Page 15
Service Commission notifying us of those. The only one that I am unclear on is item
#4. Um, um and there was some discussion about if he in fact had served enough
time as a lieutenant. And I don't know that for a fact.
Chair: Can we respond to #4 at this time? Do we have anybody here with the
information dealing with action item #4?
Jed: Looks like it's a pretty blue audience. No fire representatives.
Chair: Ok. So then at this time I'm going to make a motion that we accept items 1
& 2 into record. Seconded Motion has been moved and seconded. All those is favor
say 'aye'.
'Aye'
Chair: Ok, motion passes.
• 3.Memo dated September 5, 2001 from Lt. Ohlde to the Commission
requesting approval to test for Entry Level Police Officer as well as
make changes to that test by implementing a video test.
Chair: Lt. Ohlde. Would you like to discuss with us item #3 please. Thank you sir.
Ohlde: The last Entry level test uh list that we had has expired and we would like
to ask you uh for an additional/another Entry level test. Uh, we currently have 4 uh
open uh positions and we need to test as soon as possible. At the same time, it's
kind of a two-fold question, we're looking at uh alternative resources, possibly
changing the uh existing test. The last test we've had for quite some years
(mumbling 314) and there's three different variations of that test. We want to
change the test so that we receive better applicants. So it involves uh finances and
things like that and we're working with HR. (Mumbling 323) The one right now that
is encouraging is the video testing. It's kind of a new trend that;involves situational
scenarios on video then the applicants/candidates have so much time to answer
each individual scenario. You also follow that with a reading testand also a report
writing test. So on the surface this looks like it would be a more comprehensive
• test and give us uh more applicants to work with. (mumbling 341)
• Civil Service Commission Meeting
September 26, 2001
Page 16
Chair: Do we have any questions?
Jed: E.S.- we've been working with Lt. Ohlde and and we we're very supportive of
this process. There's some details that need to be ironed out. It looks to be a very
fair process. Um, we've all reviewed it and and we're very much in support of it.
Commissioner (?): I'd like to motion that approval be granted to test for entry level
police officer and to make changes to the test implementing the video test. Motion
seconded and passed.
Chair: Item number 4. Uh, what we're going to do is we're gonna table this until we
get clarification as far as the time necessary to be on the list. And as soon as we
get that cleared, we will revisit it and I guess take the appropriate:action. So I'm
gonna make a motion that we table this item until we get clarification. Seconded
and passes. Seconded. All those in favor say 'aye'.
• Aye'
Chair: Ok. Motion passes to table item #4. Ok.
Lubovich: I don't know where we are in this agenda, but we have an item on the list
(mumbling 396).
Chair: Well right now we have successfully completed all the business except for
the hearing. And we're still waiting on the attorney. As soon as we get the
attorney (interruption by Lubovich: I'm talking about this petition that was filed
today) yeah, do we want to hear that?
Lubovich: Well, we discussed what you were going to do with the,petition. Do you
accept it? Are you going to set a hearing?
Chair: I feel that we should schedule a hearing.
Lubovich: And...
(talking over one another between Lubovich and Chair 413)
• Lubovich: I don't think anybody wants to talk about it but
• Civil Service Commission Meeting
September 26, 2001
Page 17
Chair: Being that we still have some time until the attorney gets here...
Lubovich: Well he's here, he's outside.
Chair: Oh, he is? Oh, Ok.
Woods: Again Mr. Chair, on that one issue that you're still talking about. We're uh
we're not, uh, not prepared, nor do I believe the City is prepared to uh talk about
the issues. Uh, we just wanted to go on record that there is an appeal uh that has
been uh delivered at the Chief Examiner's Office. And, uh, possibly have it set
aside for a future hearing date.
Chair: Ok, it would be as soon as possible.
Woods: As soon as possible
• Chair: That would be ok)
Woods: That would be very, very good.
Chair: So as soon as we're able to set up the time and coordinate with those on uh
the letter requesting the appeal so that everybody could have all their facts and
figures and everything together. And if the attorney is here I guess we can...(side
talking 446)
Roger: Well who's going to set the time and how is everybody going to get notified
I guess are their questions. And I don't know if you can set a time right now but
what I think, my understanding was the desire or not by some not to have it the at
the time of the meeting but that's up to the Commission, it's up to you.
Chair: Do they want to have a separate appeal? Is your request for an appeal other
than a normal meeting?
Woods: Yes sir. Glenn Woods again on the record. Uh, our desire is to have a
separate hearing outside of the normal scheduled uh commission 'meeting.
. Civil Service Commission Meeting
September 26, 2001
Page 18
Roger: Administration's understanding is also the same (mumbling 468). But it's up
to the commission. (side talking, unintelligible 471) So then someone is going to
issue a notice as to when the hearing will be? The Chief Examiner?
Chair: Yes. I'll work with (unintelligible 481)
Roger: The last item left in this is accepting into record that letter, the
certification letter. All this (mumbling 485)
Chair: I make a motion that we accept the Certification letter requesting an
appeal...
Brett: No
Chair: No?
(side talking, background noise 492)
Roger: Actually accept the Certification letter as well as the petition into the
record.
Chair: Ok. Item number 1 I accept into record. (side talking 500)
Roger: Just accept that item -mumbling 502
Tim or Ron: I make a motion that we accept into record the certification letter
dated September 1P, 2001 along with the petition to protest the certification
letter. Seconded and passed.
Chair: Motion has been seconded, all those in favor say 'aye'.
'Aye'
Roger: And just to clarify for the record you will be sending out a notice you have
granted the right to an appeal (mumbling 518)
• Chair: Yes.
. Civil Service Commission Meeting
September 26, 2001
Page 19
Roger: Ok.
Lillian Hernandez: Commissioners I just have a quick, a point of clarification. My
name is Lillian Hernandez. I'm Chief steward for AFSCME 2617, which is our local
union, and under action items for discussion number 5 is typed on here and we have
requested it to be pulled. And unfortunately it was not pulled of the actual agenda.
Chair: Ok, that's why we didn't address it.
Hernandez: And, correct, but also there's a point of clarification that we want to
make sure is reflected in the record. Where it says local 2617 to reorganize part-
time employees in the Kent Police dept. into Civil Service should say,"recognize", not
reorganize. But this time we do wish that to be pulled.
Chuck Miller: I just wanted to advise you that uh Mr. Krieble who conducted the
Captains exam has also been uh contracted with to perform the Lieutenants and
Sergeants promotional exam and that we'll be moving forward with that process.
Chair: Ok, thank you. Is there any other business to come before the Commission.
Seeing none. Motioned to adjourn meeting and motion seconed. All those in favor
say 'aye'.
'AYE'
Chair: Ok, this Commission in now adjourned. Thank you all very much. (1712)
Meeting adjourned at 6:03 p.m.
The next regular Civil Service Meeting will be held at 5:15 p.m. on Wednesday,
October 241h, 2001.
Respectfully submitted,
Natalie Winecka
Civil Service Secretary & Chief Examiner
Approved:
air Callius Zdoratkiewicz
Winecka, Natalie
rom: Winecka, Natalie
ent: Friday, October 19, 2001 3:20 PM
To: _Fire All Personnel; _Police All Personnel;Anh Hoang; banisters@uswest.net; Becky Fowler;
Brett Vinson; Cheryl Viseth; Dea Drake; Debra Leroy; Jan Banister;jczak@iam751.org; Jed
Aldridge; Jim White; Joe Bartlemay; Karen Ford; Kathleen Senecaut; Marvin Bartlemay; Mike
Martin; Natalie Winecka; RobS@council2.com; Roger Lubovich; Rose Jacob; Steve Ohlde;
Sue Viseth; Tammy McQueeney; TGimenez@msn.com
Subject: Minutes from September's meeting
Please click on the icon below for the minutes from the September 26th Civil Service meeting.
CSmeeting09260
S.doc
Thank you,
Natalie Winecka
Civil Service Chief Examiner
•
1