Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Committees - Civil Services Commission - 04/18/1996 CITY OF KENT CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES April 18, 1996 Members Present: Mike Pattison Ron Banister Scheduling Conflict: Callius Zaratkiewicz Others Present: Officer Pagel, Dea Drake, Sue Viseth, Karen Ford, Andi Costello, Sgt Knapp, Lt. Mitchell, Cpt Jim Miller, Barbara Haney, Lt. Shepard, Chief Angelo, Lt. Cline, Chief Crawford, Police Evidence Technician- Dave Santos, others present. Chair Pattison called the meeting to order at 8:04 a.m. I. COMMISSION BUSINESS: II. HEARINGS III. OLD BUSINESS • A. Accept into Record 1. Chair Pattison moved to approve the Minutes from the March 21, 1996 Civil Service Commission Meeting. Seconded and carried. IV. NEW BUSINESS A. Approval and Accept into Record 1. Chair Pattison moved to approve and accept into record the memo dated March 12, 1996 from Chief Crawford to Director of Operations, Brent McFall requesting two additional Corrections Sergeants. The memo also has Mr. McFalls approval signature dated March 18, 1996. Seconded and carried. 2. Chair Pattison moved to approve and accept into record the letter dated March 18, 1996 from Chief Crawford to Mark Pocock confirming his appointment as probationary Police Officer effective April 2, 1996. Seconded and carried. 3. Chair Pattison moved to approve and accept into record the Police Sergeants promotional announcement dated March 22, 1996. Seconded and carried. 4. Chair Pattison moved to approve and accept into record the letter dated March 25, 1996 from Chief Crawford to Jorge A. Domena confirming his appointment as probationary Police Officer effective May 1, 1996. Seconded and carried. Lt. Cline announced that • at the time Officer Domena comes aboard he will be the 100th Police Officer hired. Page 2 Civil Service Minutes April 18, 1996 5. Chair Pattison moved to approve and accept into record the letter dated March 25, 1996 from Chief Crawford to Gerald D. Gee confirming his appointment as probationary Police Officer effective July 16, 1996. Seconded and carried. 6. Chair Pattison moved to approve and accept into record the letter dated March 25, 1996 from Chief Crawford to Mark D. Tarantino confirming his appointment as probationary Police Officer effective July 16, 1996. Seconded and carried. 7. Chair Pattison moved to approve and accept into record the letter dated March 25, 1996 from Chief Crawford to David A. Trogdon confirming his appointment as probationary Police Officer effective May 1, 1996. Seconded and carried. 8. Chair Pattison moved to approve and accept into record the Certified letter dated March 26, 1996 from the Civil Service Examiner to Police Officer candidate, David Carr Jr. notifying him that his name has been removed from the Entry Level Police Officers Eligibility List due to his Psychological Examination. Seconded and carried. 9. Chair Pattison moved to approve and accept into record the Certified letter dated March 29, 1996 from the Civil Service Examiner to Police Officer candidate, Matthew C. Christensen notifying him that if he did not respond to the letter within five business days of receiving it, his name will be removed from the Lateral Police Officer Eligibility List. Seconded and carried. 10. Chair Pattison moved to approve and accept into record the Certified letter dated April 1, 1996 from the Civil Service Examiner to Police Officer candidate, James R. Firth notifying him that his name has been removed from the Entry Level Police Officers Eligibility List due to his failure of the Psychological portion of the Selection process. Seconded and carried. 11. Chair Pattison moved to approve and accept into record the letter dated April 3, 1996 from Chief Crawford to Robert L. Scholl confirming his appointment as probationary Police Officer effective May 1, 1996. Seconded and carried. 12. Chair Pattison moved to approve and accept into record the memo dated April 4, 1996 from Assistant Fire Chief Berg to Chief Angelo notifying him of his intent to resign effective July 31, 1996. Seconded and carried. 13. Chair Pattison moved to approve and accept into record the memo dated April 5, 1996 from Captain Jim Miller announcing that effective March 15, 1996, Andi Costello was appointed Acting Records Manager. Seconded and carried. 14. Chair Pattison moved to approve and accept into record the memo dated April 8, 1996 . to Police Officer Tracey Church notifying her of a pre-disciplinary hearing. Seconded and carried. Page 3 Civil Services Minutes April 18, 1996 15. Chair Pattison moved to approve and accept into record the letter dated April 9, 1996 from Chief Crawford to Sandra E. Templeton confirming her appointment as probationary Police Officer effective June 18, 1996. Seconded and carried. 16. Chair Pattison moved to approve and accept into record the memo from Glen Woods notifying the Commission that Sergeant Emerson has returned to full duty status effective April 9, 1996 at which time Acting Sergeant Walker returned to his normal duties. Seconded and carried. 17. Chair Pattison moved to approve and accept into record the letter dated April 10, 1996 from Chief Crawford to Corrections Lieutenant Lutz notifying him that he has successfully completed his probationary period effective March 29, 1996. Seconded and carried. 18. Chair Pattison moved to approve and accept into record the Position Description for new position of Administrative Assistant Patrol. Seconded and carried. 19. Chair Pattison moved to approve and accept into record the Position Description for Police Sergeants which has been updated to reflect ADA requirements. Seconded and carried. The following two items were added to the Agenda at this time: 20. Chair Pattison had the Civil Service Examiner read the letter dated April 6, 1996 from the Records Section Support Staff and signed by same, stating that they wished to go on record in support of Dave Santos being appointed to a new position of Support Services Manager. The letter was not signed by the three Records Supervisors. Chair Pattison moved to approve and accept the letter into record. Seconded and carried. 21. Chair Pattison moved to approve and accept into record the resignation memo from Connie Walker forwarded to the Civil Service Examiner on 04/16/96 by Kelli Rogers. Ms. Walkers resignation to be effective April 24, 1996. Seconded and carried. Page 4 Civil Service Minutes April 18, 1996 B. Action Items for Discussion 1. Chair Pattison opened for discussion the memo dated March 21, 1996 from Lt. Cline requesting permission to conduct a Corrections Sergeant Promotional examination. Lt. Cline stated that there was not a current Eligibility List for the position and thus they needed to begin the promotional process. Commissioner motioned that permission be granted to conduct a Corrections Sergeant Promotional Examination. Seconded and carried. 2. Chair Pattison opened for discussion the memo dated March 21, 1996 from Captain C.E. Miller notifying his staff of the request for the Corrections Sergeant promotional exam and outlining his recommendations regarding the exam. Lt. Cline stated that the exam would follow along the same lines as the Police Sergeants promotional exam. It would consist of two parts. First part would be a written exercise and the second to be an Oral Interview. • Commissioner Banister motioned that the Corrections Sergeants Promotional Exam be divided into two parts, written and oral. Seconded and carried. 3. Chair Pattison opened for discussion the memo dated April 5, 1996 from Chief Crawford to the Commission informing them of a reorganization in the Police Department that would move management of the Evidence Unit and the Records Unit under a single civilian manager and seeking authorization from the Civil Service Commission to appoint David Santos, currently a civilian police department employee, to the new position of Support Services Manager. Dea Drake, Vice President of Local 21K ASFME: "We represent the Support Unit. I'm here to tell you that the Union has no objection to doing this. I do have a couple of comments. The memo number 20 from your Records Section, refers to the new position being represented by us when we .........and of course the union concurs with their analysis that we would like to see the position represented as well. The only thing that we would be interested in is that if this does work out or in the event that Dave Santos vacates this position for some reason, we would like to see the City reconsider the possibility of looking at this again because we feel that the only negative aspect of this, in our opinion, is that it could limit some of our members ability to advance because of the specialized nature of the Evidence Technician position. But at this time we have no objections." John Pagel, Uniformed Kent Police Officers Association: "I think that I have some concerns. I think that the letter speaks for itself and I think that Dave Santos's record speaks for itself. As far as the abilities. But, I think that this is a subjective move for this situation. It is not being looked at objectively. When you change job descriptions to make somebody fit into a job Page 5 Civil Service Minutes April 18, 1996 description sometimes you get into a difficult situation. Dea alluded to it a little bit when she said that if it doesn't work out can we look at it and change it back? If you're going from that mind set from the beginning, I think that there could be some concerns. I feel somewhat of a heel getting up and speaking out against Dave because he's a really good guy, but whether somethings proper or improper should be looked at objectively as opposed to subjectively." Sue Viseth, Human Resources Director: "if I may, I would like to point out although I know that this is not Civil Service jurisdiction, but in the letter#20 where it does talk about the request to have the position represented, I just want to go on record that it is the Citys position that is a management position even if reorganized and would not be appropriate for that bargaining unit." Chair Pattison then asked for the City Attorneys input. C/A Lubovich: "There are some problems. As I understand it this looks like a promotional to me. The position is a higher paid position, to my understanding. I may be wrong on that but if that is the case the Rules do not allow for a direct transfer but a promotional. To do this you would have to ignore the Rules. The kind of promotional exam could be very • limited. The Rules allow for a resume review or an oral interview, you could limit the scope of any testing that is convenient. It looks like a promotional is not the same category as far as pay class. It looks like a new position and there is some difficulty with that. It could be reclassified and a position created as long as administration is behind that. But the point is it would be a promotional." Commissioner Banister: "Does this have to voted on at this meeting or could we table it until the next meeting when we have time to look into it further? Chief Crawford: "If you could show me in the Civil Service Rules where we have to do that. I was not aware that there was an absolute? C/A Lubovich: "Rule XIV, Section 1." Chief Crawford: "If I may see it. Section 1 Transfers, basically says that we have to follow Rule XII. I think Rule XII is rather ambiguous about this whole thing. It does not state, as I read it, exactly what Mr. Lubovich stated. But take that away, lets just suggest that you have the test. The one thing that we don't want to do is make a facade of the test process. I don't think that any one of us here want to go through an exercise of writing a promotional exam for one person. I think what the Civil Service Commission truly wants from Department Heads is to be honest and up front and forthright in their requests for that. • Page 6 Civil Service Minutes April 18, 1996 Sure, we can write a promotional examination. We can write a job description. We've all seen it happen throughout our careers of where Agencies organizations have done that and we've all said it was phoney. In this case, an overriding majority of the people in the unit themselves want this individual to be in this position as we reorganize. If it were anything different than that I would not have done it. If we are going to require the examination then all we are doing is making this process phoney." Commissioner Banister: "The question that I would have Chief is that the letter was signed by everyone but the three supervisors?" Chief Crawford: "Yes." Commissioner Banister: "Are the supervisors here? Do they have any input? Why didn't they sign it?" Andi Costello, Records Supervisor: "Maybe I can explain it. I'm one of the supervisors. It wasn't in protest. It was an individual decision. I think it alludes to what Dea brought up is that . in the future if this position were to be vacated by Dave that we would support it being again a civilian position to be able to promote from within. But it is not in protest of Dave. All three supervisors would support Dave in that position." Chief Pattison: "Question. Does this follow the rules of the Civil Service Commission?" C/A Lubovich: "In my opinion, no. I'll read the rule so that it is very clear. Rule XIV, Section 1: The change of an employee from a rank with a lower rate of pay to a rank of a higher maximum rate of pay should be deemed a promotion and may be accomplished only in the manner provided for in Rule XII. Rule XII in Section 6 deals with a promotional appointment. Rule XIV goes on to say that a transfer from higher to lower is a demotion. You can do a direct transfer if its one position to another within the same or comparable rank. You have to either amend the rule or ignore it." Commissioner Banister: "The question I have is this something we have to decide at this meeting or can it be tabled until next month to enable us to look at it a little further? I'm not comfortable right now with the way its going?" C/A Lubovich: "I'm don't know what the time frame is on this." Chief Crawford: "Obviously if the Civil Service Commission says no and you think that a promotional examination can be an oral examination and you have a period of time, we can do . it that way. I have to reiterate what I said before. Thats phoney. Page 7 Civil Service Minutes April 18, 1996 I, in respect to Mr. Lubovich think that the Civil Service Commission can set some standards and interpret the Rules and set some Rules that are consistent. Again, lets call it a promotion because it is an upgrading in pay in moving to another position. I would like to move along because we have our plate full of things and we as an agency would like to keep going. But I will do whatever Civil Service wants to do." Dea Drake: "Roger, I'm unfamiliar with this process. By going through this process is it required to go outside or can it be internal only?" C/A Lubovich: "It can a promotional internal. He could go ahead and do this but if someone wants to challenge its subject to a challenge. If no body is going to challenge it its not an issue. If its internal, whose going to challenge it, except somebody in the City who'd want to go through the promotional process." Dea Drake: "So, in order to meet your requirements and Chief Crawfords requirements you could post it for five days and if no one applies then theres no problem?" C/A Lubovich: "I don't see one. I think Catherine has some concerns." • Examiner Guiguet: "My concern is, are you talking about a Records Manager promotional or a Support Services Manager promotional, which would have to have Evidence experience? We don't even have a position description for the Support Services Manager, that would be the first thing that we would need to do." Dea Drake: "Don't you need that so you can create the position anyway?" Examiner Guiguet: "Yes, those are steps that would be done before we actually open for promotion." Captain J. Miller: "Just one comment. I command over that section. About the timetable. One of the other matters on the Agenda is a request to have a Civil Service Examination authorized for the position of Records Specialist due to a resignation. We have a vacancy in the Records Manager position, we now have as of April 24th a vacancy in the Records Specialist category. We have a relatively substantial impact on the unit as a result of the Annexation on the East Hill. From that standpoint the timeline, if we can decide on the right course of action today, would be much more practical based on the impact on the unit and the employees than waiting for another month." Chief Crawford: "If there, and I think Roger stated it perfectly, we all know certainly that if there is an appeal of anyone that is interested and belongs to Civil Service would have an opportunity to appeal this. We said early on, if there is that threat or if someone objects to this function then we won't do it this way. The members themselves are the ones who asked, the Civil Service members, themselves are the ones that are asking for this. Page 8 Civil Service Minutes April 18, 1996 For me, it helps us in the operation of our organization to move along. I don't disagree, if this function doesn't work out or if Mr. Santos breaks his foot and is no longer there, that we re- evaluate. But we organizationally would like to try this position." Examiner Guiguet: "I'd like to finish the point I was making earlier. In regards to doing the promotional if you were going with the new position and it was decided to do a promotional for this position, the fact is that we do not have people internally who would meet the evidence requirement. That would mean that we would have to go outside. That was all I was trying to state regarding the Support Services Manager, my understanding of what that would become." Dea Drake: "Do you have to have more than one person to qualify?" Examiner Guiguet: "You have to have a promotional exam, you need to have more than one person for it. The Chief has the Rule of Three, he has the choice of the top three." C/A Lubovich: "I'm not sure that it requires three candidates. If there is only one applicant, in the past we've opened it up, but I'm not sure that we must have three." • Examiner Guiguet: "In the past the Mayor or his people had to approve any new positions. Does that position have to be approved?" Chief Crawford: "First of all, this position is not a new FTD there is a position vacancy, okay. It is approved by my supervisors in terms of the administrative side of the city." Chief Angelo: "Although the Police Department business obviously has nothing to do with us in a way. It is healthy for us to agree, and discuss and disagree. My concern is this--and I agree with Chief Crawford, we don't want to make a facade. At the same time I don't think we want to set any precedents. When we turn around and, I know Mr. Santos and the things I know of him and interacting with him I think he is a great person and probably best suited for this. Correct me if I'm wrong, probably there has been some discussion already about, we're going to do this, who might be interested, some informal stuff. So to a certain extent there has probably been some discussion, or for lack of exactness, an informal Oral Board, finding what peoples interests are. I think it is very dangerous to appoint somebody based upon the support of other co-workers without a promotional. No so much in this case but for the precedent it sets. What it says is that the next time around will that be weighed more or not? My concern is this, in the Fire Department is it likely that this rule then would be—because it would be sort of a new rule by action--pressed. Yet, everything I've heard the Commission require us to do would be, as was stated earlier, to remain very objective. I think that the time lines and I think that the Chief has the right first of all to set down the criteria, set down the number of candidates that are acceptable for him to consider, much of the work has been done. If he had the freedom to go in there based upon the candidates within a limited period apply saying that they want to. Page 9 Civil Service Minutes April 18, 1996 Whatever process he considers as an Oral Interview, that would give him, to me, a list of probably the one person he needs to fully satisfy everybody. At the same time protecting the process enough so that it doesn't overlap into Fire. I would have difficulty. It would seem strange if I was given authority to make a decision like that. I think that it is much cleaner for the future situations if there is a very simple but honest and straight forward process. If it has been honest and straight forward its a matter of formalizing it." Commissioner Banister: "I'm not against it in any way. I think that it is something that we probably need and would probably work great, but, are we setting a precedent? Are we going against the rules? Those are the things that I would like, in my own mind, feel more comfortable with." Captain Jim Miller: "I think the way the memo from the Chief was worded to you, that we are asking for your authorization to make this move. Is the fact that it would carry forward into any other incidence of a similar nature that it would be you, the Commission, that would authorize the action and it would not be automatic just because of the fact that it occurred once." Chief Crawford: "Maybe if I can walk us out of this. We don't want to put the Commission in a difficult position, nor Mr. Lubovich. Why don't we do this, as long as it is out front and I really • respect Norm trying to keep the integrity of the system. Thats why we didn't want to in the first place have a promotional and work a job description for one person. We can do it but what does the system look like? Now we can walk around it and say, if I have the authority to make the Provisional appointment and then do the job description and then come back to the next Civil Service meeting with my job description, the function of that descriptiorn and the candidate that I think is available for that position. If there are others in the Agency that can do that, thats fine too and then I'll present it to the Civil Service Commission for permanent for that position. That brings the integrity of the position, that we have a test." Examiner Guiguet: "We do have an Acting Records Manager at present, whose appointment is good up to six months." Chief Crawford: "If I may, I was going to make a provisional appointment and move Mr. Santos into that position as we start down the road and then have the job description come forward and all of the other functions that should comply with the Rules. We're up front and we'll come to Civil Service again after the so called test." C/A Lubovich: "Basically the motion would be to allow for Provisional appointment of Dave Santos and that would allow Chief the opportunity to present the job description. (To Chief Crawford) we're trying to figure out the motion. You want to come back at the next meeting with the job description for the permanent position?" Chief Crawford: "And the test results. We will advertise within the Agency. You want to make sure that you keep the integrity of the system in terms of moving if you call it a promotion that • you have to have a competitive examination." Page 10 Civil Service Minutes April 18, 1996 C/A Lubovich: "Basically, you're authorizing a promotional at this point." Chief Crawford: "And a Provisional". C/A Lubovich: "I'm assuming its like an Oral Interview type process?" Chief Crawford: "Yes." C/A Lubovich: "I would think that thats covered, did I miss anything?" Examiner Guiguet: "Is it okay to do that when we don't have an approved position description for a position that doesn't exist?" Sue Viseth: "Roger, if I may. I would be happy to work with the Chief to help him create that job description. I think that we can, with the descriptions that we currently have, we can put that together in about a week or so that would be authorized and approved through the Human Resources Department to expedite this." C/A Lubovich: "Catherines question is there is no position now but there is a vacant position, I • don't know how you want to categorize it." Sue Viseth: "I think the provisional appointment will be to the vacant position and then the actual promotional exam will be for the newly created position, the job position which will be devised later." Examiner Guiguet: "Does Mr. Santos meet the current position description which is the past Records Managers minimum qualifications? I don't have the position description here but I think it states that they have to have at least two years as a Records Specialist." Sue Viseth: "I would want to double check, Catherine, but I think that it states Administrative experience." Examiner Guiguet: "That particular one has not been signed by the Commission, but it could be approved today because it has been signed off by the Chief. Because Ms. Canbansag the incumbent had left and there was a question regarding the education and experience, it had not been processed further. If you approved the updated Records Manager position description today, we could then go forward. Mr. Santos meets those criteria" Chair Pattison recessed at 8:40 a.m. to allow time for the Examiner to return to her office and get the new position description. Chair Pattison: "Civil Service Meeting will now come back to order. It is 9:03 a.m. First of all Commissioner Banister will make some opening comments and then I'll make a motion and then we'll go from there." Page 11 Civil Service Minutes April 18, 1996 Commissioner Banister: "What we want understood is that the Commission has no objections to this in any way, shape or form other that we would have liked to have been informed and not had all this thrown at us with no preparation, no advance warning, no way to look things up and investigate the way we would like to have done prior to this meeting. In the future, if something like this comes up and we're notified in advance so that we can check rules and regulations and do our ground work that we like to do in advance. It would have saved a lot of time and confusion this morning. It is kind of confusing. It is kind of mind boggling to have something this important thrown on you with no advance warning. This is a request from the Commission. We understand the need. We understand it can work. We understand the person involved is great at what he does. We have no objections from that standpoint. We will put it in the form of a motion. Thank you." Chair Pattison: "Therefore I move to approve the position description for Police Records Manager, parenthetically I'm informed by Sue Viseth that Mr. Santos meets those requirements. Also, to approve the Provisional appointment of Mr. Santos to Police Records Manager. • Finally to request that Chief Crawford bring to the next Civil Service meeting the Support Service Manager position description in the format for filling the position." Commissioner Banister: "Second." The motion was then carried. 4. Chair Pattison opened for discussion the memo dated April 5, 1996 from Lt. Cline requesting permission to conduct an examination for Administrative Assistant. The position to be opened for applications to all City employees but not open to the public. Lt. Cline stated that this was a new position. There are currently two positions, one at Corrections and one in Detectives. There may be some lateral transfers within the three positions so that the actual position opening might not be in Patrol but one of the other two which would be announced prior to the beginning of the examination. Commissioner Banister motioned that the position be opened for applications to all City employees but not open to the public. Seconded and carried. 5. Chair Pattison opened for discussion the memo dated April 12, 1996 from Captain Jim Miller requesting authorization to conduct an examination for Police Records Specialist due to the resignation effective April 24, 1996 of Records Specialist Connie Walker. Commissioner Banister moved that authorization be given to conduct an examination for Police Records Specialist. Seconded and carried. • Page 12 Civil Service Minutes April 18, 1996 Chair Pattison: "Any other business to come up today? There being no further business to come before the Commission I move to adjourn." Seconded and carried. Adjourned at 9:07 a.m. The next Regular Meeting will be held on Thursday, May 16, 1996 at 8:00 a.m. in Council Chambers West. Respectfully submitted, Catherine M. Guiguet Civil Service Secretary & Chief Examiner • Approved: Mike Pattison, Chair •