* This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting. TESTING. [00:00:01] ALL RIGHT. UM, I WOULD LIKE TO CALL GOOD AFTERNOON, EVERYONE. I'M SORRY. I WOULD LIKE TO CALL THE, UM, TODAY'S MEETING THE JULY, JULY 29TH, 2021 MEETING. I'D LIKE TO, UH, UH, ADJOURN THE MEETING AT THIS TIME. SO, UM, THANK YOU FOR COMING TODAY. I'M GLAD THAT YOU'RE HERE. AND, UH, WE'LL GO AHEAD [1. ROLL CALL] AND GET STARTED WITH THE ROLL CALL. YEAH. OH, START WITH I'M SORRY. COMMISSIONER. WANDA DANSON COMMISSIONER, JEFF LYNN WATSON, PRESENT AND COMMISSIONER GREG WILLIAMS PRESENT. OKAY. WE'VE GOT A COUPLE [2. CONSIDER ADOPTING THE MINUTES OF THE COMMISSION MEETINGS OF MAY 24, 2021 AND JUNE 17, 2021] OF THINGS ON THE AGENDA THAT, UM, ONE OF THEM IS A CLEANUP ITEM FROM, UH, MAY 24TH AND ALSO FROM JUNE 17TH. UM, THE MAY 24TH MEETING WAS A VIRTUAL MEETING, HAS BEEN BROUGHT TO MY ATTENTION, BUT AS I GO BACK AND I LOOK OVER THE MINUTES, I NOTICED THAT, UM, THE NAME HUMAN RESOURCES, DIRECTOR, MARSAL MARTIN RUSSELL, AS BEING PRESENT AT THAT MEETING. AND I DON'T RECALL IF HE WAS THERE. HE WAS PRESENT IN THE STAFF ROOM IN THE MEETING, BUT YOU MAY NOT HAVE BEEN ABLE TO SEE HIM. I'M JUST SAYING, HEY, I'M MARTIN RUSSELL FROM HUMAN RESOURCES. I, YOU KNOW, ANNOUNCING WHO HE WAS. SO, UM, OKAY. IF YOU SAID HE WAS THERE, UM, UM, I'LL, I'LL, I'LL ACCEPT THAT, BUT, UM, OTHER THAN THAT, UM, UM, I HAVE NO, NO, NO ISSUES WITH THE MINUTES FROM THE MAY 24TH MEETING. UM, AND THAT'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION FOR APPROVAL. I COMMISSIONED A WANDER JOHNSON WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO ACCEPT THE MINUTES FOR MAY 24TH, 2021 WITH FLEXIBILITY, IF THERE'LL BE ANY COMMISSIONER JACLYN WATSON, I SECOND THE MOTION. OKAY. IT'S BEEN PROPERLY MOVED. AND SECOND THAT WE ACCEPT THE MINUTES FROM THE MAY 24TH, 2021 MEETING IS IN READINESS. NO ON READINESS. UH, I'D LIKE TO ENTERTAIN A MOTION FOR A VOTE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE, ALL THE POLLS RIGHT NOW, AS WE MOVE FORWARD TO THE JUNE 17TH MEETINGS. AGAIN, I, I TOO HAVE HAD OPPORTUNITY TO GO THROUGH, UH, THIS DOCUMENT. UH, I HAVE NO ISSUES WITH RESPECT TO THE DOCUMENT AND ENTERTAIN A MOTION FOR APPROVAL OF THE JUNE 17TH, 2021 MINUTES. COMMISSIONER WATSON. I MOVE FOR THE ADOPTION OF THE JUNE 17TH, 2021 MINUTES AS WRITTEN SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER WALTER JOHNSON FROM PROPERLY MOVED. AND SECOND THAT WE APPROVE THE MINUTES FROM THE, FROM THE JUNE 17TH MEETING 2021. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION INDICATE YOUR PREFERENCE, BUT IN THE KITCHEN, ALL THOSE, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION, PLEASE INDICATE YOUR PREFERENCE BY SAYING AYE. AYE. ALL OPPOSED THE SAME. RIGHT. ALL RIGHT. AND MOTION PASSES. OKAY. SO THAT, UH, WAS ONE OF THE ITEMS THAT WE NEEDED TO CLEAR UP. UM, [3(a) Receive a presentation on draft proposed rules and discuss possible changes to such rules. (Proposed presenter: Junior Associate Assistant City Attorney Monica Nunez-Garza)] AT THIS TIME I'D LIKE TO, WE HAVE A PRESENTATION REGARDING, UM, THE POLLS RULES AND DISCUSS POSSIBLE CHANGES TO RULES AND, UM, UM, ASSOCIATE CITY ATTORNEY MONICA NUNEZ GAZA IS GOING TO PRESENT THIS AT THIS TIME. THANK YOU, CHAIR WILLIAMS. AND SO, UH, WE GATHERED INPUT AND CONSIDERED IT FROM THE FIRE ASSOCIATION, FROM THEIR COMMENTS AT THE LAST MEETING ON JUNE 17TH. UH, WE GATHERED ADDITIONAL INPUT FROM THE FIRE DEPARTMENT AND FROM THE POLICE DEPARTMENT. AND SO WE HAD A FEW ROLES THAT WE WANTED TO PROPOSE EDITS TO FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION. AND SO I'M JUST GOING TO GO IN RURAL ORDER JUST FOR EASE. SO THE FIRST PROPOSED CHANGE IS TO ROLL 11 G UM, POLICE OFFICERS ARE REQUIRED TO HAVE ACCESS TO CRIMINAL HISTORY DATABASES, BOTH NATIONAL AND OR EXCUSE ME, FEDERAL AND STATE, AND, UH, PART OF THEIR ACCESS TO THE CRIMINAL HISTORY DATABASES THAT, UM, THE STATE MANDATES THAT THEY NOT A POLICE OFFICER NOT HAVE CERTAIN CONVICTIONS. AND SO WHAT WE DID WAS, UM, INSTEAD OF JUST HAVING, UH, I GUESS, UM, ONE POLICY THAT ADEPT OR ONE ROLE [00:05:01] THAT APPLY TO BOTH THE FIRE DEPARTMENT AND THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, WE HAVE SEPARATED THAT OUT. SO FORMALLY IT WAS THAT A FELONY CONVICTION MAY BE SUFFICIENT TO DISQUALIFY AN APPLICANT FROM TESTING OR FORMER APPOINTMENT. UM, BUT THAT WILL ACTUALLY DISQUALIFY A POLICE OFFICER FROM, UM, FROM TESTING OR APPOINTMENT. SO THEN WE HAVE SEPARATED IT OUT. SO FOR POLICE DEPARTMENT APPLICANTS, A RECORD OF A FELONY CONVICTION OR DEFERRED ADJUDICATION WILL DISQUALIFY THE APPLICANT AS WELL AS BEING UNDER A CURRENT INDICTMENT OR CHARGE. AND THE WORDING BEING UNDER A CURRENT DIAMOND OR CHARGE IS A SLIGHT CHANGE FROM THE PACKET THAT WE SENT OUT AND POSTED TO THE PUBLIC. AND THEN ALSO A RECORD OF A CLASS, A MISDEMEANOR, OR A CONVICTION OR DEFERRED ADJUDICATION. UM, WE'LL DISQUALIFY AN APPLICANT AS WELL, AS WELL AS I RECORD OF A CLASS B MISDEMEANOR CONVICTION OR DEFERRED ADJUDICATION WITHIN THE LAST 10 YEARS. AND THIS IS BASICALLY JUST MARRYING DEPARTMENT, UH, REGULATIONS AS WELL AS, UM, TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY REGULATIONS AS THEY ARE OUR CRIMINAL JUSTICE INFORMATION SYSTEM AGENCY. AND THEY HAVE, UM, THESE REQUIREMENTS IN PLACE. AND SO BASICALLY THE, UH, FORMER ROLE WOULD STILL APPLY TO FIRE DEPARTMENT APPLICANTS. THEY WILL NOT AUTOMATICALLY BE DISQUALIFIED, BUT IT MAY BE SUFFICIENT TO DISQUALIFY AN APPLICANT. ANYONE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS ROLE AT IT? I HAVE A REQUEST. YES, SIR. AND IF IT'S JUST TO EDUCATE ME, WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE OR GIVE ME SOME EXAMPLES OF A CLASS, A MISDEMEANOR, AND A CLASS B MISDEMEANOR. SO AN EXAMPLE OF A CLASS B MISDEMEANOR WOULD BE A POSSESSION OF MARIJUANA CHARGE UNDER TWO OUNCES. IT WOULD ALSO BE A DRIVING WHILE INTOXICATED, ALL OFFENSE, A CLASS, A MISDEMEANOR WOULD BE A DRIVING WHILE INTOXICATED ALL FENCE A SECOND OR MORE, OR WHAT THE BLOOD ALCOHOL CONTENT OF 0.1, FIVE OR MORE. UM, IT WOULD ALSO BE AN ASSAULT FAMILY VIOLENCE IS AN EXAMPLE OF A MISDEMEANOR, A, UM, AND, AND ALSO A, UH, POSSESSION OF MARIJUANA CHARGE BETWEEN TWO AND FOUR OUNCES. OKAY. I HAVE A QUESTION AS WELL. SO I UNDERSTAND WHY THE CHANGE WAS MADE TO SEPARATE THE QUALIFICATIONS OR JUST QUALIFICATIONS FOR THE POLICE DEPARTMENT APPLICANTS AND THE FIRE DEPARTMENT APP APPLICANTS. BUT, UH, I DO SEE THAT THERE ARE FOUR, UH, DISQUALIFYING, UM, FACTORS OR DISQUALIFYING, UM, REQUIREMENTS FOR, UH, POLICE OFFICERS AND ONLY THREE FILLERS FOR ONLY THREE FOR THE FIRE DEPARTMENT APPLICANTS. SO MY QUESTION IS, ARE THESE THE STATUTORY MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS FOR EACH OF THE DIFFERENT DEPARTMENTS, THE NUMBER FOUR FOR THE POLICE DEPARTMENT AND THE THREE FOR THE PARDON? YES, THIS WOULD ACTUALLY, WELL IT'S, UM, IT'S NOT UNDER THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE. SO, UM, I MEAN, SO THE FOUR WOULD MIRROR THE TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY REQUIREMENTS FOR ACCESS TO THE CJ SYSTEM. SO THAT WOULD BE YOUR TEXAS CRIMINAL HISTORY, UM, DATABASE OR COMPUTERIZED CRIMINAL HISTORY WOULD BE, UH, THE TEXAS CRIMINAL INFORMATION SYSTEM AS WELL. UM, AND THEN IN CIC, WHICH IS THE NATIONAL DATA. SO BASICALLY THERE ARE THE FOUR BEFORE DISQUALIFYING, UM, CATEGORIES, ARE THOSE THINGS THAT WOULD PREVENT OR PRECLUDE A PERSON FROM HAVING ACCESS TO THOSE DATABASES, WHICH IS A PART OF THERE, WHICH WOULD BE A PART OF THEIR JOB. THAT IS CORRECT. AND SO THIS WOULD EVEN, UM, YOU KNOW, APPLY NOT ONLY POLICE DEPART, UH, SO NOT ONLY POLICE OFFICERS, BUT MEMBERS OF THE POLICE DEPARTMENT. SO SUPPORTING STAFF THAT WOULD ACTUALLY HAVE TO RUN THE CRIMINAL HISTORY AS WELL. AND IF THEY HAD ONE OF THESE, THIS QUALIFYING FACTORS, THEY WOULD BE, THEY COULDN'T ACCESS IT. RIGHT? SO FOR, I MEAN, IT'S DIFFERENT FOR AN APPLICANT VERSUS AN INCUMBENT OR SOMEONE WHO IS ALREADY LICENSED AND WITH THE DEPARTMENT, THOSE, UH, REQUIREMENTS WITHIN THE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY ARE DIFFERENT. UM, BUT LIKE A RECORD OF FELONY CONVICTION OR DEFERRED ADJUDICATION IS ACTUALLY A PERMANENT DISQUALIFIER UNDER TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY REQUIREMENTS. THANK YOU. SO LET ME ASK THIS ONE QUESTION. AND SO YOU'RE SAYING AS I LOOK HERE AT, UH, BRAVO TWO FOR THE FIRE APPLICANTS, SO A RECORD OF MISDEMEANOR CONVICTION FROM A STATE, FROM A STATE OR A I'M ASSUMING THAT'S OR FEDERAL COURT MAY BE SUFFICIENT TO DISQUALIFY. SO IF I HAVE A CLASS C MISDEMEANOR AS A FIRE APPLICANT, DOES THAT MEAN I AM NOW DISQUALIFIED FROM FURTHER TESTING? I MEAN, EIGHTIES UP TO THE FIRE DEPARTMENT. SO IT'S PERMISSIVE THEY CAN BE CONSIDERED, BUT IT'S NOT AN AUTOMATIC DISQUALIFIER. LIKE IT WOULD, I MEAN, I CLASSICALLY WOULDN'T BE AN AUTOMATIC DISQUALIFIER EITHER FOR THE POLICE [00:10:01] DEPARTMENT, THE WAY I READ THIS LANGUAGE, IT SAYS IT COULD BE A DISQUALIFIER. I MEAN, I'M NOT, I'M NOT AN ATTORNEY, BUT I'M JUST SAYING, AS I READ THIS THE WAY THIS READS TO ME, IT SAYS ANY MISDEMEANOR CONVICTION. SO IF IT'S A CLASS C MISDEMEANOR, YOU KNOW, NOT THAT I WOULD NEVER DO THIS, BUT I, I, I SEE IT SOMETHING BAD BACK TO A COP, YOU KNOW? AND SO, YOU KNOW, OKAY, WE, YOU, YOU, YOU SAID SOMETHING BAD TO ME. SO NOW YOU'RE CHARGED WITH A CLASS C MISDEMEANOR. I TRY TO APPLY FOR THE FIRE DEPARTMENT. I'M LIKE, OKAY, WELL, I, YOU JUST QUALIFY FOR CLASSY MISDEMEANOR, WHICH BASICALLY I THOUGHT IT WAS A SLAP ON THE WRIST. I'M JUST, I'M JUST, I'M BRINGING IT UP BECAUSE THAT'S HOW I READ THAT. AND SO W UH, WOULD YOU PREFER THAT IT WOULD BE A CLASS B MISDEMEANOR OR ABOVE, OR HERE'S WHAT I'M SAYING? YOU CLEARLY DELINEATED AND SPELLED OUT UNDER THE POLICEMAN, BUT YOU DIDN'T DO THAT WITH THE FIREMAN. AND SO I THINK I WOULD LIKE TO SEE A LITTLE MORE NARROW CLEAR-CUT DECISION WITH WHAT IS THE CUTOFF. YOU WOULD MAKE ONE AND TO MIRROR MORE THAN HOW WE HAVE IT SEPARATED OUT, PLEASE. AGAIN, THE WAY I READ THAT IF I HAVE A CLASS C MISDEMEANOR THAT COULD BE USED AGAINST ME TO DISQUALIFY ME, THAT'S WHERE I READ THAT I COULD BE WRONG. I THINK I WENT TO SCHOOL IF I DID NOT PAY US BY IT, BUT THAT'S THE WAY I READ THAT. AND SO THE CONCERN IS THAT IF SOMEONE IS THAT'S MY CONCERN, RIGHT, IT, IT COULD BE USED AS A MECHANISM TO SCREEN SOMEBODY OUT UNFAIRLY. WE CAN CERTAINLY GET WITH THE FIRE DEPARTMENT AND SEE IF THEY WOULD LIKE TO SEPARATE, UH, LIKE AS TO SEPARATE THAT ROLLOUT BETWEEN CLASS B IN CLASS A AND SHOW US TO NOT DETER ANYONE, A CLASS C MISDEMEANOR I'M APPLYING. CANNOT. CAN I ASK FOR CLARIFICATION JUST TO MAKE SURE THAT, THAT MY, MY UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT'S BEFORE ME IS CORRECT, OR, OR YOUR INTENT. SO IN REGARDS TO THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, THE LANGUAGES, IT WILL DISQUALIFY YOU AS AUTOMATIC. IT'S NOT NEGOTIABLE. IT IS, IT'S A HARD STOP EITHER YES OR NO, CORRECT? THAT IS CORRECT. OKAY. AND FOR THE FIRE DEPARTMENT, IT IS, IT MAY BE IT'S, UH, IT MAY BE A FACTOR AND, AND THE WAY THIS IS CURRENTLY WRITTEN, UH, THE DISCRETION IS GIVEN TO THE ACTUAL FIRE DEPARTMENT AS TO, TO MAKE THAT FINAL DECISION, BUT IT CAN BE A FACTOR BECAUSE THE W WORDING IS, MAY BE SUFFICIENT. THAT'S CORRECT. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. AND THEN THE ONLY OTHER THING IS IF THERE IS A TYPO IN ROMAN, IT, UH, TO, UH, YOU KNOW, FROM A STATE OR WOULD YOU MAKE THAT CORRECTION INSTEAD OF THE, UH, OKAY, THANK YOU. AND SO THE NEXT ROLE IS ROLE 17, THE ELIGIBILITY FOR PROMOTION. UM, SO UNDER B ONE PREVIOUSLY, WE HAD THAT, UH, THE RANK THAT IS EQUIVALENT TO THE CAPTAIN IN THE FIRE DEPARTMENT IS THAT OF THE DIVISION CHIEF AND FIRE MARSHALL. WE HAVE STRUCK FIRE MARSHALL REAL QUICK. WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO PAUSE THE MEETING FOR JUST A SECOND. HE'S GOT TO DIAL IN. SURE. WE HAVE PEOPLE WANTING TO DOLLAR WELCOME TO WEBEX, PRESS ONE, TO BE CONNECTED TO YOUR MEETING. OKAY. HELLO. [00:15:02] HELLO. WE'RE BACK ON. OKAY. UM, SO, AND THIS IS JUST A HR QUESTION. SO I AM, I HAVE TO ASSUME THAT THE TITLE OF CAPTAIN HAS BEEN STRUCK FROM THE APPROVED LIST OF POSITIONS ROLES WITHIN THE, UM, YOU KNOW, OF TITLES THAT YOU'RE USING SINCE DIVISION CHIEF IS THE EQUIVALENT OF A CAPTAIN. YEAH. SO IN THE FIRE DEPARTMENT, THE EQUIVALENT WOULD BE AT THE DIVISION. OKAY. SO THERE IS NO CAPTAINS IN FIRE DEPARTMENT. THAT'S CORRECT. THERE WERE NONE BEFORE I AM. I'M ACTUALLY NOT SURE ABOUT THAT. I DIDN'T KNOW. BACK IN YESTERYEAR, I COMMISSIONED A WANDA JOHNSON HAVE A QUESTION WITH REGARDS TO, UH, YOUR TITLE B, WHEREAS THIS FOUR YEARS ACTUAL SERVICE REQUIREMENT, BUT THEN IN YOUR EXPLANATION, IT SAYS, HAS AT LEAST FOUR YEARS. SO THAT'S, THAT'S CONFUSING TO ME. IT'S EITHER FOUR OR IT'S NOT BECAUSE YOU SEE HERE, YOU SAID FOUR YEARS ACTUAL SERVICE REQUIREMENT, BUT THEN IN YOUR EXPLANATION, YOU SAID A FIREFIGHTER OR A POLICE OFFICER THAT IS NOT ELIGIBLE FOR MOTION OF CAPTAIN OR ITS EQUIVALENT, UNLESS THE PERSON HAS AT LEAST FOUR YEARS. YES. SO IS IT FOUR OR MORE OR FOUR OR LESS? IT'S A FOUR OR MORE, SO THEY HAVE TO HAVE FOUR. YES, THAT'S CORRECT. SO WOULD, THIS IS A COUNCIL, I MEAN, COMMISSIONER, JACLYN WATSON. SO WOULD IT BE APPROPRIATE TO REVISE THE TITLE TO FOUR YEARS OF A MINIMUM OF FOUR YEARS IN ACTUAL SERVICE OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT? UH, COMMISSIONER YES. THAT WOULD BE, THAT WOULD BE MORE ACCURATE IN LINE, MORE IN LINE, UP WITH THE ACTUAL LANGUAGE. RIGHT. I AGREE WITH THAT. SO THEN, UM, YOU WOULD WANT THE TITLE OF SECTION B2B MINIMUM FOR YOUR ACTUAL SERVICE REQUIREMENTS, A MINIMUM OF FOUR YEARS, ANY OTHER ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS REGARDING FULL 17, MOVING ON TO ROLL 26. THIS WAS THE ROLE THAT THE FIREFIGHTERS ASSOCIATION, UM, HAD COMMENTED ON IN THE PREVIOUS MEETING. AND SO WE TOOK THAT INTO CONSIDERATION. AND SO NOW THE ROAD READ THAT THE CITY COUNCIL IS ALSO RESPONSIBLE FOR ESTABLISHING PAYOUTS, IF ANY, FOR SEPARATING EMPLOYEE, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO A LUMP SUM PAYMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF THE POLICE OFFICER OR FIREFIGHTER SALARY FOR ACCUMULATED SICK LEAVE ABOVE 90 DAYS, VACATION LEAVE OR ANY OTHER FRINGE BENEFIT. AND SO THAT WOULD ENCOMPASS THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 1 43 0.045, UH, THAT THE FIREFIGHTERS ASSOCIATE HADN'T BROUGHT UP PREVIOUSLY. AND THOSE ARE THE PROPOSED CHANGES AT THIS TIME. AND THEN, UM, WE WILL MAKE THE ADDITIONAL CHANGES WE DISCUSSED. OKAY. UM, AT THIS TIME IT'S, UH, WE HAVE PUBLIC COMMENTS AND, UH, LIEUTENANT IBARRA HAS STATED THAT HE WOULD LIKE TO COMMENT GOOD EVENING. GOOD EVENING, HUH? OKAY. OKAY, HERE WE GO. SORRY ABOUT THAT. I'LL BE QUICK. UH, THE RULE 17, THE PROPOSED CHANGES TO CALL A CAPTAIN BEING EQUIVALENT TO A DIVISION CHIEF. IT'S IMPOSSIBLE WITHIN 1 43, AS FAR AS THE RANK STRUCTURE, HOW IT OPERATES WITH THE YEARS OF SERVICE [00:20:01] REQUIRED TO REACH THAT RANK. YOU SIMPLY CAN'T REACH THAT LEVEL IN FOUR YEARS. SO THAT WOULD BE OUR ISSUE WITH THAT WILL. AND I WAS GOING TO, AND I'M GLAD YOU BROUGHT THAT UP BECAUSE, AND I GUESS THIS HELPS ME FROM A CAREER LADDER STANDPOINT. I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW BASICALLY FROM A FIREMAN, RECRUIT UP TO A DIVISION CHIEF. I'M LIKE, YOU ALL THINK THAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN IN FOUR YEARS. I WOULDN'T WANT THAT JOB FOR FOUR YEARS. CAUSE I DON'T THINK I KNOW ENOUGH, BUT WHAT IS THE TYPICAL CAREER? I MEAN, WHAT ARE THE CAREER, UH, CHECK MARKS? WHEN, WHEN DO YOU START HITTING CERTAIN BENCHMARKS IN TERMS OF YOUR PROMOTION SCHEDULE? WELL, FOR THAT, THAT, THAT APPLICANT, IF YOU WILL, THAT CANDIDATE, THAT, THAT GETS A JOB, AN ENTRY LEVEL, HE OR SHE, UH, THEIR FIRST YEAR, IT DOESN'T TECHNICALLY COUNT IN A CIVIL SERVICE. SO THEY WOULD HAVE TO DO A FULL YEAR TO THEN BECOME ELIGIBLE, TO START THEIR TIME CLOCK. SO ESSENTIALLY IT EQUALS THREE YEARS BEFORE THAT HE OR SHE COULD PROMOTE FROM THE FIREFIGHTER POSITION, THE FIREFIGHTER LEVEL TO A DRIVER OPERATOR. IN THIS CASE, THEY'RE TRYING TO LABEL IT DIFFERENTLY, BUT IT'S A DRIVER OPERATOR CLASSIFICATION. IT WOULD TAKE AN ADDITIONAL TWO YEARS IN GRADE TO THEN BE RECOGNIZED, WHICH WOULD GIVE YOU FIVE TO BECOME A, BECOME A LIEUTENANT. AND THEY WOULD TAKE ANOTHER TWO YEARS TO REACH BATTALION CHIEF, WHICH TAKES YOU TO SEVEN TO THEN BE ELIGIBLE TWO YEARS LATER, NINE TO THEN BE ELIGIBLE FOR A DIVISION CHIEF. SO THAT'S WHY IT DOESN'T WORK FOR US AS FAR AS CALLING APPLES TO APPLES. OKAY. LET ME SEE IF I GET THIS RIGHT. SO YOU HAD THREE YEARS AS A FIREFIGHTER. YES, SIR. AND BE ELIGIBLE TO PROMOTE TO THE DRIVERS TO BE ELIGIBLE, TO PROMOTE PROMOTIONS. YES. EVEN AFTER PROMOTION, YOU DO YOUR TEST AND YOUR NEXT STEP IS DRIVING. YOU ARE ELIGIBLE. YOU WILL BE PROMOTED TO A LIEUTENANT AFTER TWO, IF AN OPEN-ENDED IS, IF AN OPENING IS A VACANCY, IS THERE AFRICAN CAN PROMOTE TO THE LIEUTENANT, CORRECT. FIVE YEARS INTO IT. YES. SO HE'S THREE. AND SO THEN HE HAS TO STAY AN ADDITIONAL TWO YEARS. THEN HE MOVES INTO BATTALION CHIEF. IS THAT CORRECT? YES, SIR. SEVEN YEARS NOW HE'S SEVEN YEARS INTO HIS CAREER. AND THEN AFTER BATTALION CHIEF DIVISION INDIVIDUAL HAS TO STAY AN ADDITIONAL FOUR YEARS, TWO YEARS, TWO YEARS IN GRADE TO THEN BE ELIGIBLE, TO PROMOTE TO DIVISION CHIEF. SO IT'S IMPOSSIBLE TO GO FROM THREE, ZERO TO FOUR. I'LL LET A DIVISION CHIEF RANK AS EQUIVALENT SPEAKING ON THE PD FOR POLICE. AND I KIND OF WISH I HAD A CHALKBOARD. I'M KIND OF ONE OF THOSE OLD FESTERS, NOT A VISUAL LEARNER. SO, SO YEAH, SO I GET THREE AND THEN YOU DO YOUR THREE PROMOTED LIEUTENANT. YOU DO TWO THEN FROM TWO, YOU, YOU GO TO BATTALION CHIEF. AND SO, SO AT BATTALION CHIEF, YOU HAVE TO DO TWO ADDITIONAL YEARS. THAT'S CORRECT. OKAY. SO NOW YOU'RE AT NINE YEARS, THAT'S CORRECT. OKAY. AND SO WHEN DOES THIS KICK IN? THERE'S FOUR YEAR. IT DOESN'T, IT DOESN'T IT'S APPLES AND ORANGES. THE TIMELINES DON'T DON'T MATCH. THAT'S WHY I WOULD LIKE TALK BOARD OR SOMETHING WHERE WE COULD, I UNDERSTAND BECAUSE I'M LIKE, I DON'T SEE IT. YES, SIR. OKAY. I HAVE THAT. OKAY. UH, THIS IS, UH, COMMISSIONER JACLYN WATSON. I HAVE TWO QUESTIONS, ONE TO USER AND ONE. UM, AND I'M NOT SURE BOTH QUESTIONS SHOULD BE ADDRESSED TO YOU OR, UH, TO, UH, THE, UH, THE STAFF. SO DOES THE CITY OF MISSOURI CITY HIRE OTHER, UM, HIRE FIREFIGHTERS, UM, FROM OTHER CITIES? SO SAY, SAY I'M EXPERIENCED THAT WORKS FOR STAFFER FOR FIVE OR SIX YEARS, AND THEN THERE'S AN OPENING AND OPPORTUNITY. UH, AND I, WOULD YOU HIRE ME AND WOULD I COME IN AT THE SAME RANK THAT I HAD AT THE PREVIOUS, WITH MY PREVIOUS EMPLOYER? AND WHAT I'M TRYING TO GET AT IS, IS, IS THIS FOUR YEAR REQUIREMENT SOMETHING THAT WOULD APPLY TO ALL NEW HIRES BECAUSE WE DON'T HIRE A EXPERIENCED FIREFIGHTERS OUTSIDE OF, UH, UH, THE CITY OF MISSOURI CITY. SO WE'RE NOT SURE WE GET THE, THE CONCERN BECAUSE IT'S THE, THE LANGUAGE IS FOUR YEARS TO GET TO DIVISION CHIEF. SO IT'S A MINIMUM OF FOUR YEARS FOR THE START OF SERVICE. SO IT'S GOING TO TAKE SEVERAL YEARS TO GET THOSE. SO THEY'RE GOING TO BE GREATER THAN THAT. IT'S GOING TO BE GREATER THAN THAT. BUT TO ANSWER YOUR OTHER QUESTION, NO, THEY DID NOT COME IN. THEY START LIKE NEW AND START OVER. CORRECT. OKAY. SO THERE'S CIVIL SERVICE AND THAT'S OKAY. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. AND SO THEN MY QUESTION TO YOU [00:25:01] IS BASICALLY WHAT, WHAT THE CHIEF JUST SAID SINCE IT'S A MINIMUM REQUIREMENT, IT'S THE, IT'S THE FLOOR. IS THAT THE CEILING? UH, I'M NOT SURE WHAT THE CONCERN IS BECAUSE YOU, YOU CAN'T, YOU CAN'T ACHIEVE IT. SO, BUT IT'S THE FLOOR IT'S JUST SAYING BEFORE YOU CAN EVEN MAKE, CONSIDER, YOU MUST HAVE 40 YEARS. THE CONCERN WOULD GO BACK TO THE PREVIOUS, UH, UH, RULE CHANGE THAT WAS PROPOSED, WHERE THE COMMISSION HAD CONCERNS ABOUT BEING MORE SPECIFIC. IT MIGHT BE MORE TIME, LET IT BE MORE DEFINITIVE ON WHAT THE DEFINITIONS ARE. AND THAT'S WHAT WE WERE LOOKING FOR TO BE CLEAR ON THAT. AND IF I, SORRY, IF I, I DIDN'T MEAN TO INTERRUPT, BUT, UM, IF I MAY INTERJECT HERE COMMISSIONER, SO THE REASON WHY IT SPECIFICALLY SAYS FOUR YEARS IS BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT THE STATUTE SAYS. SO THAT'S WHAT LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 1 43 0.028. IT STATES THAT A FIREFIGHTER IS NOT ELIGIBLE FOR PROMOTION TO THE RANK OF CAPTAIN OR ITS EQUIVALENT, UNLESS THAT PERSON HAS AT LEAST FOUR YEARS ACTUAL SERVICE IN THAT FIRE DEPARTMENT. SO THE RULE IS REALLY JUST COMPLYING WITH THE STATUTE. BUT AGAIN, I DON'T KNOW, I WILL SEE STUDENTS. WHAT CAN I SAY? BUT AS I READ THIS LANGUAGE TOO, TO THE LIEUTENANT'S POINT, THOUGH, THIS LANGUAGE CLEARLY SAYS FOUR YEARS, THE ACTUAL SERVICE IN THE DEPARTMENT. NOW IT SAYS IT RELEASE, SIR. YES, IT SAYS AT LEAST FOUR, BUT YOU KNOW, I COME FROM A UNION BACKGROUND. AND SO, UM, UM, I'M VERY CAREFUL OF LANGUAGE BECAUSE LANGUAGE IS WHAT OUR ARBITRATOR IS GOING TO HOLD YOU TO IS WHAT WAS THE, WE, WE, WE UNDERSTAND THIS, THE TENT IS THAT, HEY, IT'S GOING TO TAKE, YOU KNOW, CAUSE I KNOW YOU'RE NOT GOING TO BE A DIVISION CHIEF FOR FOUR YEARS. I KNOW THAT. BUT THE LANGUAGE IN THIS SAYS, ALL YOU NEED IS FOUR YEARS. THAT'S ALL THE LESS WHAT THAT LANGUAGE SAYS. AS I READ IT, IT DOESN'T SAY ANYTHING ABOUT THIS PROGRESSION. AND THAT'S WHY I WAS ASKED, WHAT ARE THE CAREER MILESTONES? IT DOESN'T SAY ANYTHING ABOUT THOSE OTHER CAREER MILESTONES. IT JUST SAYS FOUR YEARS IN THE DEPARTMENT. AND THAT'S WHERE I READ THAT. I THINK IF WE WERE TO ADOPT, LET'S SAY A NINE YEARS IN SERVICE REQUIREMENT, WE WOULD NO LONGER BE COMPLYING WITH THE STATUTE. AT THAT POINT, IF WE SAID A MINIMUM OF NINE YEARS OR A MINIMUM OF SEVEN YEARS, WE WOULDN'T NO LONGER BE IN COMPLIANCE. AND SO THAT IS WHY WE HAVE THE FOUR YEAR MINIMUM. SO THE PROGRESSION IS NINE YEARS. SO IT WOULD TAKE NINE YEARS TO TEST FOR THAT DIVISION CHIEF. SO AS THEY GO THROUGH FROM FIREFIGHTER TO DRIVER, THEN DRIVER TO TENANT AND THEN LIEUTENANT TO, UH, BATTALION CHIEF TO DIVISION CHIEF, THERE'S TWO YEARS IN BETWEEN EACH. SO WE TAKE A TOTAL OF NINE YEARS. SO LIKE YOU SAID, IT'S JUST THE FLOOR OR THE BOTTOM LEVEL. AND I, AND I THINK IT'S BECAUSE OF STATUTE REASON. AND I AGREE, I, I UNDERSTAND IT. I UNDERSTAND. THAT'S WHY I ASKED THE QUESTION, WHAT WERE THE CAREER MILESTONES? BUT I'M READING THIS LANGUAGE. THIS LANGUAGE CLEARLY SAYS FOUR YEARS. SO IF I'M, IF I WANT TO JUST CAUSE TROUBLE, I CAN SAY, HEY, I'M FIVE YEARS IN YOUR DEPARTMENT. I WANT TO APPLY FOR, UM, OR CAPTAIN OR EQUIVALENT BECAUSE I GOT FOUR YEARS IN THE JOB. THAT'S ALL WHAT THAT LENGTH OF STATUTES. WON'T LET YOU, BECAUSE IT SAYS, IN ORDER TO APPLY FOR THE TASKS, YOU HAVE TO HAVE TWO YEARS OF SERVICE IN THE PRIOR RANK, THE STATUTE ITSELF 1 43. SO YOU ALREADY HAVE TO BE A BATTALION CHIEF FOR TWO YEARS BEFORE YOU CAN EVEN TEST FOR DIVISION CHIEF. SO IT WAS ADDITIONAL WORDING. THAT'S NOT THE ONLY WORDING USE FOR PROMOTIONS IN CHAPTER 1 43. IS THERE A WAY THAT THAT COULD BE FURTHER CLEANED UP? WE CAN CERTAINLY LOOK INTO ADDITIONAL WORDING BECAUSE I, BECAUSE FOR ME, I THINK WHAT SHOULD HAPPEN, IDEALLY, WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE IS YOU LINE OUT THE CAREER MILESTONES. SO THAT WAY, BECAUSE AS I READ THAT LANGUAGE AND I'VE, I'VE, I'VE DEALT WITH GRIEVANCES ON, ON, YOU KNOW, JUST, UH, AMBIGUOUS LANGUAGE BECAUSE PERSON THINKS, HEY, I CAN, I CAN APPLY FOR A JOB BECAUSE THIS IS WHAT I MET, BUT WELL, NO, THIS, THIS IS WHAT IT REALLY MEANS. AND THE TWO YEAR REQUIREMENT, AND THE NEXT LEVEL BELOW IS ACTUALLY ENROLLED 17 THAT'S RULE 17, A IN THE DRAFT PROPOSED RULES. BUT WHAT'D YOU LIKE TO SEE ADDITIONAL WORDING BESIDES WHAT'S IN A RULE 17 A AND I'M NOT TRYING TO CREATE ANY ADDITIONAL, A MINISTRATIVE BURDEN ON ANYONE. AGAIN, FOR ME, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE CAREER, YOU KNOW, MILESTONES CLEARLY LINED OUT. SO THAT WAY IT GET RID OF IT, GET RID OF IT. YOU ELIMINATE ANY AMBIGUITY? HEY, I DID FOUR YEARS BASED ON IF I JUST READ [00:30:01] THAT LANGUAGE, I REALLY, I DID FOUR YEARS. I SHOULD BE ABLE TO APPLY FOR THAT JOB, BUT IT DOES HAVE IN THE ROLE, JUST THE RULE SECTION, JUST ABOVE IT, THAT YOU WOULD STILL HAVE TO HAVE THAT TO YOUR, UM, BUT IT'S, I DON'T, I DON'T, I I'M ONLY LOOKING AT WHAT I'M LOOKING AT. I DON'T, I DON'T KNOW THE LANGUAGE BEFORE THAT. I'M JUST READING WHAT WAS BEEN PRESENTED IN FRONT OF ME. WOULD YOU LIKE ME TO PUT THAT? THE, YEAH, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THAT. OKAY. SO WITH ALL OF THIS DISCUSSION GOING ON, OKAY, I'M SITTING HERE AND I'M JUST READING THE LANGUAGE AS IT IS NOW. AND IT SAYS A FIREFIGHTER OR POLICE OFFICER THAT IS NOT ELIGIBLE FOR PROMOTION OF CAPTAIN. AND IF I'M UNDERSTANDING YOU CORRECTLY, AS WELL AS, UH, LIEUTENANT, UH ABARA BEFORE YOU GET TO THE CAPTAIN'S POSITION, YOU'VE GOT TO GO THROUGH AT LEAST THREE OR FOUR OTHER STEPS BEFORE YOU GET TO THAT. SO THAT LANGUAGE DOESN'T SAY THAT IT DOESN'T SAY THAT. YEAH. AND I AGREE WITH YOU. I AGREE WITH YOU BECAUSE IT'S, IT'S JUMPING ALL OF THE OTHER STEPS AND IT'S TAKING YOU DIRECTLY INTO THE POSITION WHERE YEAH, THAT'S, THAT'S, THAT'S A LITTLE CONFUSING. AND BASED UPON WHAT, UH, LIEUTENANT KIBERA, UH, UH, STATED WAS THAT THERE ARE SEVERAL OTHER LAYERS BEFORE YOU CAN EVEN GET TO THE CAPTAIN OR DIRECTOR'S POSITION. IS THAT CORRECT? I UNDERSTOOD BECAUSE MY INITIAL COMMENTS IS YOU'RE NOT GOING TO BE A DIVISION CHIEF FOR FOUR YEARS. YOU DON'T HAVE ENOUGH EXPERIENCE. YOU DON'T HAVE ENOUGH LIFE EXPERIENCE MUCH. LET'S TALK ABOUT FIREFIGHT EXPERIENCE THAT YOU'RE GOING TO BE A DIVISION CHIEF IN FOUR YEARS. THAT'S JUST NOT GOING TO HAPPEN, BUT THE WAY THAT LANGUAGE READS. AND LIKE I SAID, I'VE BEEN IN ARBITRATIONS, I'VE BEEN IN GRIEVANCE HEARINGS, OWN LANGUAGE THAT CLEARLY IS NOT LINED OUT. AND THIS IS, I THINK AGAIN, THAT'S WHERE I, I'M NOT TRYING TO BE AN ADMINISTRATIVE BURDEN, BUT I THINK WHAT NEEDS TO HAPPEN HERE IS A CLEAR DELINEATION ON WHAT ARE THE CAREER MILESTONES SAY YOU GOT YOUR FIRST YEAR AS A FIREFIGHTER. YOU KNOW, BASICALLY IT IS WHAT IT IS. AND THEN AFTER YOU ARE DEEMED A FIREFIGHT AFTER THAT ONE YEAR PROBATIONARY PERIOD, YOU'RE IN THAT ROLE A MINIMUM OF THREE YEARS BEFORE YOU'RE ELIGIBLE TO TEST AND HOPEFULLY PROMOTE TO AN OPERATOR DRIVER, OKAY. THEN AS THREE, THEN I HAVE TO BE AN OPERATOR DRIVER A MINIMUM OF TWO YEARS BEFORE I'M ELIGIBLE TO TEST AND HOPEFULLY PROMOTE TO LIEUTENANT. AND SO, AGAIN, I'M NOT TRYING TO HAVE IT BE AN ADMINISTRATIVE BURDEN, BUT AS I READ THAT LANGUAGE JUST AS IT IS, AND AGAIN, I, I I'M, I'M JUST A C STUDENT. I'M THINKING ALL I GOTTA DO IS FOUR YEARS. THAT'S WHAT THE LANGUAGE TO THE LADDER IS IDENTIFIED IN 1 43, WHICH IS WHAT WE HAVE TO FOLLOW FOR PROMOTIONS. THIS IS AN ADDITION TO 1 43. SO THE LADDER IS IDENTIFIED WHAT YOU WERE TRYING TO PULL UP 1 43 APPLIES FIRST, AND THEN THESE ANY ADDITIONAL RULES AND REGS WHERE THIS IS AN ADDITION TO THAT LADDER, THIS LANGUAGE. SO THIS ISN'T THE SOLE WAY TO APPLY. YOU STILL HAVE TO FOLLOW THAT LADDER FIRST. WELL, LET ME ASK THIS QUESTION THEN DOES 1 43 SAY THAT YOU HAVE TO DO FOUR YEARS MINIMUM? YES. THEY JUST HIGHLIGHTED IT IN THE RULES AND REGS AS A HIGHLIGHT, EVEN THOUGH IT'S ALREADY IN THE RULES IN THE 1 43. SO THEN ARE YOU SAYING 1 43 POINTS? OH, TWO EIGHT. GIVES THAT EXPLANATION OF WHAT YOU JUST SAID. YES. IT'S RULE ONE. THEY SHOULDN'T RULE 16 AND 16. YES. OKAY. IT SAYS ELIGIBILITY FOR PROMOTIONS, NO ENTRY LEVEL FIREFIGHTER OR AN ENTRY LEVEL. A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER IS ELIGIBLE. THIS IS A RULE 16, A NO ENTRY-LEVEL FIREFIGHTER OR ENTRY LEVEL LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER IS ELIGIBLE FOR TESTING OR PROMOTION TO THE NEXT HIGHER RANK, UNLESS THE EMPLOYEE HAS SATISFIED THE MINIMUM TIME AND A GREAT REQUIREMENT OF TWO YEARS AS REQUIRED BY THE STATUTE. THEN B SAYS OF FIREFIGHTER, A POLICE OFFICER IS NOT ELIGIBLE FOR PROMOTION TO THE RANK OF CAPTAIN OR AS EQUIVALENT UNLESS THE PERSON HAS AT LEAST FOUR YEARS OF ACTUAL SERVICE. AND THE RESPECTIVE DEPARTMENT SEES AS IT WAS A FIREFIGHTER OR POLICE OFFICERS IS RECALLED ON ACTIVE MILITARY DUTY FOR NOT MORE THAN 60 MONTHS TO TWO YEAR SERVICE REQUIREMENT PRESCRIBED UNDER SECTION 1 43 0.028. UM, [00:35:01] DO NOT APPLY AN EMPLOYEE IS ENTITLED TO HAVE TIME SPENT ON ACTIVE MILITARY DUTY, CONSIDERED AS A DUTY IN THE RESPECT OF FIRE POLICE DEPARTMENT. AND THEN D SAYS THE COMMISSION MAY NONETHELESS OPEN AN EXAMINATION TO PERSONS IN THE NEXT LOWER RANK WITH LESS THAN TWO YEARS OF TIME IN GREAT. IF ONE OR MORE OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS EXISTS. NUMBER ONE, THERE ARE LESS THAN TWO ELIGIBLE CANDIDATES TO TEST FOR THE POSITION IN THE RANK IMMEDIATELY BELOW THE RANK FOR WHICH A TEST IS BEING HELD. OR IF AFTER CONDUCTING ONE PROPOSED PROMOTIONAL TESTS WITH A MINIMUM OF TWO CANDIDATES, NO CANDIDATE PASSES THE TEST AND THE LIST CAN BE CERTIFIED. AND THEN YOU GET TO RULE 17, WHICH HAS AN, A, B AND C, WHICH IS THE B IS DIFFERENT. AM I WRONG HERE? IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S DIFFERENT FOR WHAT YOU W WHAT'S HERE ON, ON, ON THE SCREEN. I'M SORRY, IF YOU LOOK AT, I'M LOOKING AT THIS DOCUMENT, THESE ARE THE PROS. THESE ARE THE PROPOSED INITIAL SET OF CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION RULES AND REGS AND RULE 17 TITLED PROMOTIONAL EXAM. THE B THAT THAT'S IN THE HARD COPY IS DIFFERENT FROM THE B THAT THAT'S ON, ON THAT YOU SHARE WITH US IN THE POWERPOINT. THIS SHOULD, UH, THAT SHOULD BE THE, UM, THE DRAFT THAT WAS POSTED FOR PUBLIC COMMENT. I THINK THAT WHEN IT WAS ROLL 16, THAT MIGHT'VE BEEN A PREVIOUS VERSION. OKAY. WHAT WAS THE LANGUAGE PRIOR TO THIS? W WHAT WAS THE, YOU KNOW, THE LANGUAGE, I GUESS WHAT I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND, WHAT IS THE LANGUAGE THAT YOU'RE TRYING TO AMEND WITH THIS PROPOSED DRAFT? THE ONLY DIFFERENCE IS WE STRUCK FIRE MARSHALL FROM, SO IT USED TO SAY DIVISION CHIEFS, LAST FIRE MARSHALL. AND SO FIRE MARSHALL HAS BEEN STRUCK. AND THEN THE ONE, IS THERE SOMEWHERE IN, IN THESE PROPOSED RULES, WHICH TALKS ABOUT THE ORDER OF PRECEDENTS IN TERMS OF GOVERNING RANK, UH, AS FAR AS, UM, RIGHT. STATUTORY LAW, THEN REGULATIONS, THEN, THEN POLICIES, IS THERE, IS THERE A STATEMENT TO THAT EFFECT? SO DO WE KNOW THE ORDER OF RANK? YES. SO THAT WOULD BE IN THE PROPOSED A DRAFT, WHICH IS RULE SEVEN TITLE, RELATIONSHIP TO OTHER CITY RULES AND POLICIES. AND SO THE RANK WOULD BE CHAPTER 1 43, THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE FIRST, THEN THE CHARTER OF THE CITY, UM, THE CIVIL, UH, WHICH WOULD INCLUDE ANY ORDINANCES AND THEN THE, UH, CIVIL SERVICE RULES AND REGULATIONS. THEN THE DEPARTMENT RULES, REGULATIONS, AND DIRECTIVES, AND THEN THE CIVILIAN PERSONNEL POLICY, MAN. THANK YOU. SURE. MY LAST POINT IS I DO AGREE. WE NEED TO SPELL OUT THE RANKS OR THE, WHAT DID YOU CALL IT? COMMISSIONER CAREER MILESTONES FOR YOU PULL THAT UP. CAN I JUST, IF IT'S ALREADY IN THERE REFER TO THE REFERENCE. OKAY. OKAY. SO, UH, COMMISSIONER WALTER JOHNSON. SO THE ONLY, UH, THE ONLY OBJECTION FOR THE FIRE DEPARTMENT THAT, UH, LIEUTENANT ABERA BROUGHT UP WAS THE FOUR YEARS. IS THAT, IS THAT CORRECT? YOUR ONLY CONCERN WAS THE FOUR YEARS. OKAY. YEAH, I WOULD, I WOULD AGREE, UH, COMMISSIONER WATSON, AS WELL AS COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS, THAT IF WE'RE GOING TO DO RULES 17 ELIGIBILITY FOR PROMOTION, I THINK IT NEEDS TO BE, I THINK WE NEED TO PUT A LITTLE MORE MEAT IN THERE FOR CLARIFICATION, BECAUSE IF WE'RE GOING TO MAKE REFERENCE TO RULES 16, THEN IT NEEDS TO FLOW [00:40:01] RIGHT NOW. THAT'S, IT'S NOT FLOWING TO RULE 17. IT'S NOT CLEAR. SO WE WOULD REFERENCE MAYBE THE NINE YEARS IT WOULD TAKE TO GET TO THAT POSITION. YEAH, YEAH. YEAH. I THINK THERE'S SOMETHING IN THERE BECAUSE FOR SOMEONE WHO'S STRIVING TO BECOME A CAPTAIN OR DIVISION CHIEF AS COMMISSIONER WILLIAM SAYS, IF I SAW THAT AND I'VE BEEN IN THE DEPARTMENT FIVE YEARS, HEY, I'M ELIGIBLE TO APPLY FOR THAT POSITION, KNOWING THAT I'VE GOT FOUR YEARS THERE EXCEPT THE STATUTE WON'T LET YOU. RIGHT. BUT I UNDERSTAND THAT. I UNDERSTAND THAT ABOUT THE STATUTE. IF I'M LOOKING AT RULE 17. YEAH. I'M TAKING IT FOR WHAT IT IS. HERE'S MY EXAMPLE. I'M A LIEUTENANT FROM A PREVIOUS DEPARTMENT. I I'VE BEEN A FIREFIGHTER SIX YEARS. I MEAN, YOUR DEPARTMENT, I STAY IN YOUR DEPARTMENT FOUR YEARS. OKAY. SO I'VE, YEAH, I'VE, I'VE CHECKED OFF ALL THESE OTHER BOXES SOMEWHERE, BUT REGARDLESS OF THAT, I'M JUST LOOKING AT, IT JUST SAYS I'VE GOT FOUR YEARS WITH YOUR DEPARTMENT. NOT, NOT, NOT DISCOUNT THE OTHER SIX YEARS. I GOT FOUR YEARS IN MY, IN YOUR DEPARTMENT. I SHOULD BE ELIGIBLE TO TEST AND PROMOTE TO A DIVISION. CHIEF IS THEN IT TRIED TO, UM, INSERT AN EXAMPLE AND SAY, FOR EXAMPLE, IF SOMEONE TO RISE TO THE RANK OF DIVISION CHIEF, THEN THEY WOULD NEED TO HAVE FIRST HELD SO MANY YEARS IN THE DEPARTMENT PRIOR TO BEING ELIGIBLE FOR PROMOTION. ANOTHER WAY TO ADDRESS THAT IS TO EITHER SPELL IT OUT IN THE RULES SO THAT THEY, SO THERE'S RULE 17 STANDS ON ITS OWN WITHOUT YOU HAVING TO REFER BACK OR EITHER MAKE THE REFERENCES. UH, INSTEAD OF AN EXAMPLE, MAKE THE COMMENT, YOU KNOW, PLEASE REFER BACK TO RULE WHATEVER A POLICY, WHATEVER FOR A COMPLETE LIST OF CAREER MILESTONES, SOMETHING TO TIE IT BACK IN. SO THAT IF YOU JUST READ THIS 17 B ON ITS OWN ON ITS OWN FACE, THAT IT COULD BE MISINTERPRETED. AND I THINK THAT'S WHAT THE COMMISSIONERS ARE CONCERNED ABOUT. THAT THE INTENT MAY BE ONE THING, BUT, UH, THE LANGUAGE GIVES SOMEONE AN OPPORTUNITY TO CHALLENGE IT AND WE WILL HAVE TO ADDRESS IT AT THAT TIME. SO WHY DON'T WE JUST AVOID IT NOW? AND THIS MAY NOT BE THE ONLY SECTION WHERE THAT, THAT MAY BE AN ISSUE. YES, WE CAN CERTAINLY DISCUSS. AND THEN THANK YOU JUST FOR CLARIFICATION. SO THESE WERE THE DRAFT PROPOSALS ROLES THAT WERE POSTED FOR PUBLIC COMMENT. AND SO RULE 17, EIGHT THEN HAS THE TWO YEAR TIME AND RANK REQUIREMENT. UM, AND THEN ROLL B THAT HAS A FOUR YEAR ACTUAL SERVICE REQUIREMENT OR MINIMUM, OR YOUR SERVICE REQUIREMENT. AND SO IN THE PROPOSED EDIT, UH, I JUST PRESENTED, IT WAS THE FIRE MARSHALL, UM, WORDING. THAT WAS THAT WE PROPOSED TO BE STRUCK AGAIN, I'M SIX YEARS AS A FIREFIGHTER. I COME IN YOUR DEPARTMENT, I DO FOUR YEARS. SO NOW I'M 10 YEARS AS A FIREFIGHTER, I SHOULD BE ABLE TO APPLY FOR THAT JOB. THAT'S JUST ME. AND WE'LL BRING BACK TO CLARIFY THAT ISSUE. THANK YOU. OKAY. DO WE STILL HAVE AN INDIVIDUAL ON THE PHONE OR IS THAT PERSONAL TO PHONE? I BELIEVE THEY WERE, THEY WERE TESTING THE SYSTEM. UM, I DON'T, I DON'T KNOW. I DIDN'T, WE DIDN'T RECEIVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENTS FROM ANYONE CALLING IN AND SO THAT SHOULD BE IT FOR PUBLIC COMMENTS. OKAY. SO NOW WE, WE, WE TALKED ABOUT THE FIRE SIDE OF THIS EQUATION. WHAT ABOUT THE POLICE SIDE? WELL, WHAT ARE THE CAREER MILESTONES [00:45:01] FOR, YOU KNOW, UP UNTIL I BECOME A, I DON'T THINK YOU HAVE DIVISION CHIEFS AND WHAT ARE THOSE? SO YOU HAVE ONE YEAR PROBATIONARY PERIOD. IS THAT OKAY? OKAY. AND SO DOES THAT ALSO INCLUDE AS I THINK, UH, COMMISSIONER WATSON RAISE, IF I'M COMING FROM ANOTHER FIRE DEPARTMENT, UH, DO I GET CREDIT? DO I GET CREDIT FOR YOU'RE STARTING FROM THE BEGINNING. OKAY. GOTCHA. GOTCHA. GOTCHA. THANK YOU. NOW THAT OPENS UP ANOTHER QUESTION I HAVE, AND I'M JUST FULL OF QUESTIONS TODAY. SO YOU'RE SAYING THAT FIREFIGHTERS HAVE TO GO THROUGH ONE YEAR PROBATION, CORRECT. THEN AFTER THAT ONE YEAR PROBATION, THEY HAVE TO GO THROUGH THREE YEARS BEFORE THEY'RE ELIGIBLE FOR THEIR NEXT TWO YEARS AS A FIREFIGHTER, BEFORE THEY ELIGIBLE TO BECOME A OPERATED DRIVER. AND I'M JUST TRYING TO LEARN THE DEPARTMENT, THE PROCESSES, BUT ON THE, ON THE POLICE SIDE, I DON'T HAVE TO DO THAT. YEAH, I BELIEVE IT DOES BECAUSE IT'S TWO YEARS IN THE POSITION PRIOR TO THE POSITION THAT YOU'RE TRYING TO PROMOTE FOR. SO YOU ARE IN A PROBATIONARY PERIOD FOR, LET'S SAY IF THE FIRST LEVEL, UH, FOR THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, UH, P Y YOU'RE IN THAT POSITION, YOU'RE ON PROBATION FOR THAT ONE-YEAR PERIOD, WHICH IS STATUTORY, BUT WHEN IT COMES TIME TO PROMOTE, IT'S TWO YEARS IN THAT. SO YOU FEEL COME IN AS IF LIKE YOU'RE STILL IN THAT POSITION. OKAY. SO, UM, ALGEBRA PROMOTE FROM WITHIN TWO YEARS, I'M HEARING THIS, BUT IF I'M A, I HAVE THREE YEARS BEFORE, SO EVERYONE GETS A ONE-YEAR PROBATIONARY PERIOD. EVERYONE HAS TO HAVE TWO YEARS IN THAT PREVIOUS POSITION BEFORE THEY CAN PROMOTE THAT TWO YEARS INCLUDE THAT ONE YEAR PROBATION FOR UP TO, BECAUSE THEY'RE IN THAT THEY COME IN, UH, T1, I THINK F1 AND FIRE. THEY COME IN TO THAT POSITION, EVEN THOUGH THEY'RE ON PROBATION ARE STILL IN THAT RANK. THEY'RE STILL IN THAT POSITION. SO THEY HAVE TO BE IN THAT POSITION FOR TWO YEARS PRIOR TO THAT. GOTCHA. OKAY. [5(b) Discuss the upcoming schedule of events for the Commission. (Proposed presenter: Junior Associate Assistant City Attorney Monica Nunez-Garza)] SO NEXT IS STAFF REPORTS. UM, AND SO, UH, JUST WANTED TO DISCUSS SOME OF THE UPCOMING, UM, DATES THAT WE HAVE FOR MEETINGS, OR AT LEAST WE HAVE HOLDS. AND SO THAT IS AUGUST 9TH AND AUGUST 30TH. AND THEN THAT WOULD JUST BE TO CONTINUE BRINGING BACK PROPOSED EDITS FOR THE ROLES AND THEN ADOPTION OF THE RULES AUGUST WHEN I'M SORRY, I'M SORRY. AUGUST 9TH AND AUGUST 30TH. AND THOSE ARE VIRTUAL, CORRECT. THOSE CAN ALSO BE VIRTUAL. DO WE HAVE A TIME FOR THOSE? WE DON'T HAVE THE TIME. UM, IT WOULD JUST BE WHATEVER WOULD WORK FOR THE COMMISSION, BUT I THOUGHT THE COMMUNICATION, WE GOT ASKING US OUR PREFERRED DATES, I BELIEVE IT SAID AFTERNOON, BUT AT TIME WAS NOT SPECIFIED OR THAT, UH, THE COMMISSIONERS COULD BE AVAILABLE IN THE AFTERNOON. WHAT ARE WE LOOKING AT AS FAR AS TIMEFRAME TO FINALIZE EVERYTHING AND, AND [00:50:01] WE GO ONLINE. SO OCTOBER 1ST IS WHEN THE CIVIL SERVICE SYSTEM WILL BE IMPLEMENTED. UH, ADOPTION OF THE RULES WILL OCCUR PRIOR TO THAT. AND THEN THERE, BEFORE THE ROLES CAN BE BINDING ON THE COMMISSION, THEY HAVE TO BE POSTED FOR SEVEN DAYS WITHIN THE CENTRAL FIRE DEPARTMENT AND POLICE DEPARTMENT STATION. AND THEN THE ROLES ALSO HAVE TO BE MAILED OUT TO EACH OF THE FIRE BRANCH STATIONS. AND SO, UH, I WOULD SAY LATEST BY, UH, IN SEPTEMBER IS WHEN THE RULE SHOULD BE ADOPTED. OKAY. THANK YOU. WELL, I PREFER BLACK SAD PREFER AFTERNOONS MYSELF, UM, OR FIVE. IS THAT A TIME THAT, UM, IT WAS GOOD FOR HIM? YEAH. I MEAN, WE COULD DO IT AT SIX O'CLOCK CAUSE I, I, AND THIS BEAUTIFUL YEARS, 36 30 IS FINE AND WELL, SIX 30 IS A LITTLE LATE, BUT, AND ESPECIALLY, ESPECIALLY WHEN YOU START GETTING INTO OCTOBER, NOVEMBER GETTING IN TIME TWO MONTHS AND THEN IT STARTS GETTING DARK EARLY. AND, UM, SO, BUT THEN PROPOSE THAT, UH, WE MO WE, UH, SET THE, THE DATES AGAIN AS AUGUST THE NINTH AND AUGUST THE 30TH AT 6:00 PM. WOULD THAT BE SUFFICIENT? ARE THEY IN PERSON OR VIRTUAL? THEY CAN, RIGHT NOW WE HAVE THEM SLATED TO BE BOTH. UM, AND SO THAT WHOEVER CAN APPEAR IN PERSON CAN APPEAR IN PERSON, BUT WE WOULD ALSO MAKE WEBEX AVAILABLE TO ANYONE WHO WOULD WANT TO PARTICIPATE BY PHONE. OKAY. UM, I DO HAVE ONE QUESTION WITH REGARDS TO GOING BACK TO THE PROPOSED, UH, CHANGES, UM, OTHER THAN THE PROPOSED CHANGES MADE BY OR SUGGESTED BY THE FIRE DEPARTMENT. IS THERE ANY, WAS THERE ANY, UH, SUGGESTIONS OR PROPOSALS MADE BY THE POLICE DEPARTMENT? YES. THE, UH, PROPOSED CHANGES BY THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, UH, WAS TO THAT, UM, ROLL 11 G THAT STATED THAT THE CONVICTIONS, THOSE SPECIFIC CONVICTIONS, WHAT DOES QUALIFYING APPLICANTS. OKAY. OKAY. ALRIGHTY. ALRIGHTY. THANK YOU. ARE THERE ANY OTHER PUBLIC COMMENTS AT THIS TIME? I BELIEVE IT WAS ONLY LIEUTENANT IBARRA WHO SIGNED UP. OKAY. STAFF REPORTS FROM CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE. OH, I'M SORRY. THAT WAS JUST THE, THE UPCOMING SCHEDULED EVENTS. OKAY. GOOD [6(a) Update regarding appointing a Civil Service Commission Director. (Proposed presenter: City Attorney E. Joyce Iyamu)] APPOINTMENTS. UM, REGARDING THE CIVIL SERVICE DIRECTOR AND, UH, IS YOURS GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS AT THE LAST MEETING YOU ALL WERE WITH ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REGARDING THE APPOINTMENT OF A CIVIL SERVICES DIRECTOR, THE CIVIL SERVICE DIRECTOR, AS YOU KNOW, PURSUANT TO SECTION 1 43 0.012, THE COMMISSION IS REQUIRED TO APPOINT A DIRECTOR. UM, AT THE LAST MEETING, YOU ALL REQUESTED SOME ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REGARDING OTHER CITIES IN THE AREA THAT HAVE CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSIONS AND THEIR, UH, THEIR APPOINTED DIRECTORS. WE HAVE PROVIDED YOU WITH A, UM, SURVEY, ESSENTIALLY, A BENCHMARK SURVEY THAT LISTS THE CITIES IN THIS AREA AND, UH, PROVIDES YOU WITH THE PERSON OR INDIVIDUAL THAT IS SERVING AS CIVIL SERVICE DIRECTOR IN THOSE CITIES. AS YOU CAN SEE FROM THE SURVEY, A MAJORITY OF THE CITIES, UH, PROVIDE THAT A MEMBER OF THE HUMAN RESOURCES AND ORGANIZATIONAL DEVELOPMENT TEAM SERVES AS THE DIRECTOR OF THE CIVIL SERVICES COMMISSION, CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION, BUT AS MENTIONED, UH, AT THE LAST MEETING, OUR HR HUMAN RESOURCES DEPARTMENT IS A BIT SHORT-STAFFED. AT THIS POINT, THEY HAVE THREE TEAM MEMBERS, AND I BELIEVE THEY'RE HIRING ONE ADDITIONAL PERSON SOON, BUT THEY ARE CURRENTLY AT A STAFF LEVEL OF THREE. SO WITH THAT, I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. WE'LL HAVE [00:55:07] COMMISSIONERS. UM, I, UM, I'LL, I'LL, I'LL GO AHEAD AND SPEAK. MY MIND NEVER BEEN SHY BEFORE WESTSTAR NOW. UM, I'M, I'M, I'M ALL HR GUY. THAT'S, THAT'S WHAT, THAT'S WHAT I AM, THAT'S WHAT I DO FOR A LIVING. AND WHEN I INITIALLY SAW THE CANDIDATE THAT WAS PROPOSED TO ME, IT WAS NOTHING ABOUT THE CANDIDATE. I THINK, UM, IT WAS NUNEZ GARZA. I MEAN, SHE'S A NYU GRAD, UT GRAD, WITHOUT QUESTION, YOU KNOW, BEYOND PREPARED, BEYOND READY, BEYOND QUALIFIED FOR, FOR THE ROLE OF DIRECTOR. BUT AGAIN, AS I LOOK AT THIS, I THINK THIS RESIDE, I KNOW THIS RESIDES IN THE HR DEPARTMENT, THIS ROLE, THAT'S WHERE IT SHOULD BE. UM, AND I UNDERSTAND THE CITY IS SHORT-STAFFED, BUT I, I JUST IN GOOD FAITH AND GOOD CONFIDENCE AGAIN, IT'S NOT A KNOCK ON HER PERSONALLY, BUT I DON'T THINK THIS ROLE RESIDES IN THE LEGAL DEPARTMENT. I THINK THIS ROLE IS TRULY A HR ROLE IN AND MY PERSONAL, UM, AND MAYBE THAT THEY, THEY DEAL WITH CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION ALL DAY, EVERY DAY. AND, UM, UH, THEY HAVE ACCESS TO RECORDS. AND I THINK THIS IS WHERE THAT ROLE SHOULD LIE IS IN THE HR HUMAN RESOURCES DEPARTMENT. CURRENTLY, IF I MAY SUGGEST SOMETHING, UM, THEY ARE HIRING A FOURTH, UH, INDIVIDUAL AND THEN OFFICE, I DO BELIEVE THEY ARE REQUESTING AN ADDITIONAL STAFF PERSON BEGINNING OCTOBER 1ST IN THE NEXT BUDGET YEAR. UM, IF I MAY SUGGEST PERHAPS, UM, SOMEONE IN THE LEGAL DIVISION OR SOMEONE ELSE DOES IT UNTIL HR IS MORE FULLY STAFFED. AND THEN AT THAT POINT, THE PERSON CAN TRANSITION THE DUTIES OF DIRECTOR OVER TO SOMEONE IN THE HUMAN RESOURCES DEPARTMENT. THAT'S A FAIR COMPROMISE WITH MYSELF LONGER, AS LONG AS IT IS TRANSFERRED OVER TO, TO THE HUMAN RESOURCES DEPARTMENT AT SOME POINT IN TIME, GOOD EVENING, I'M MARTIN, RUSSELL, AND ADRIAN PLEASURE TO MEET EACH AND EVERY ONE OF YOU, UM, IN PERSON RATHER THAN ON ZOOM OR WEBEX. UM, BUT I DO BELIEVE THAT WOULD BE A MORE FAIR COMPROMISE AT THIS TIME. ONCE WE ARE FULLY STAFFED, IF WE ARE, UH, ABLE TO GET THAT ADDITIONAL POSITION, I THINK THAT ROLE WOULD BE MORE, UH, ACCOUNTABLE AND I THINK MORE APPROPRIATE FOR ALL PARTIES TO BE AN HR. OKAY. AND THIS TIME, IF I MAY ALSO MAKE ANOTHER SUGGESTION OF THAT WOULD ALSO BE CONTINGENT UPON AUTHORIZATION BY THE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE. I DON'T HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO DIRECT STAFF. THEREFORE I WOULD NEED TO GET HIS AUTHORIZATION OR WHOEVER IT IS AT THAT TIME THAT THEIR AUTHORIZATION FOR THIS AS WELL. OKAY. THAT'S, THAT'S, THAT'S A VERY FAIR COMPROMISE TO ME. AND AGAIN, THIS IS ALL CONTINGENT UPON THOSE THINGS HAPPENING AT THAT TIME. THANK YOU. SO WHERE ARE WE IN THE PROCESS? UM, IN TERMS OF, UH, ARE YOU WAITING UNTIL OCTOBER WHEN THE KNOW BEFORE YOU, BEFORE YOU ASKED FOR THIS ADDITIONAL STAFF OF, UH, FOR THE CITY COUNCIL AND CITY MANAGER TO APPROVE THIS ADDITIONAL STAFF, WE HAVE ALREADY ASKED FOR IN OUR BUDGET. UH, AND THAT IS A PROCESS THAT IS CURRENTLY, IS NOW UNDERWAY TO SEE IF THAT POSITION WILL BE ALLOCATED OR NOT. SO WE'LL KNOW NEXT MONTH, UM, WE WILL HAVE A GOOD IDEA BY NEXT MONTH THAT POSITION WILL BE ALLOCATED. OKAY. SURE. SEPTEMBER, WE SHOULD HAVE A PRETTY GOOD IDEA OF WHETHER WE SHOULD HAVE A PRETTY GOOD IDEA. YES. SO CAN WE PUT THAT ON THE AGENDA TO REVISIT, UM, I BELIEVE THE BUDGET TO BE ADOPTED, I THINK IT'S SEPTEMBER 16TH. SO IT WOULD BE SOMETIME. YEAH, BUT CAN WE GET A STATUS UPDATE NEXT MONTH SINCE WE HAVE TWO MEETINGS, BUT FOR FINALIZATION NOTHING'S [01:00:01] FINAL UNTIL I'M AWARE, I WOULD LIKE TO THINK THAT THERE WOULD BE SOME INDICATION THAT YOU WOULD HEAR, YOU WOULD HAVE AN INDICATION. WE MEET TWICE, WE'LL MEET THE NINTH AND THE 30TH. OKAY. SO I WOULD LIKE TO THINK THAT YOU WOULD GET AN INDICATION BY NEXT MONTH, BY NEXT MONTH AT THE SECOND MEETING, IF IT, YES, YES. PROBABLY THE FIRST, BUT, BUT YES, DEFINITELY BY THE SECOND, I THINK THE SECOND MEETING AND PROBABLY BE MORE APPROPRIATE IF WE GET SOME TYPE OF AN UPDATE, WE CAN BRING IT TO THIS COMMISSION, IF NOT, IT WOULD BE AFTER THAT. WELL, BUT THAT DAY COULD BE NO APPEARS. EXACTLY. WHICH IS FINE. EXACTLY. ALL RIGHT. AND I AGREE, BUT MY QUESTION WOULD BE IS IF IT'S, IF YOU DO NOT GET THE APPROPRIATE STAFF, THEN WHAT IS OUR PLAN B? I AGREE A GOOD QUESTION. WE DON'T GET THE APPROVAL FOR THE ADDITIONAL STAFF IN ORDER FOR US AS COMMISSIONERS TO DO OUR JOB AND TO CARRY OUT OUR ROLE. WE, WE WOULD NEED A DIRECTOR. WE WOULD NEED THAT LIAISON BETWEEN THE FIRE AND THE POLICE DEPARTMENT. SO I THINK WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT WE CAN BRING UP. UM, I THINK WE WOULD HAVE A BETTER IDEA AT THE SECOND MEETING NEXT MONTH. AND THEN WE CAN REVISIT THIS TO SEE WHAT OUR NEXT STEPS WOULD BE. UM, I THINK AT THIS TIME IT MIGHT BE A LITTLE BIT TOO EARLY TO MAKE THAT DETERMINATION, BUT I THINK AT THAT SECOND MEETING OF NEXT MONTH, MAYBE WE HAVE A BETTER IDEA AND WE CAN GIVE YOU AN UPDATE. SO THAT WAY YOU HAVE AN IDEA WHERE, UH, WHAT WE COULD DO OR LOOK IT UP, MAYBE A PLAN B IF THAT'S AN OPTION FOR US AT THAT TIME, THIS IS COMMISSIONER WATSON AGAIN, AND I, UH, I'M IN FAVOR OF HAVING A COMMISSION DIRECTOR COME FROM THE HR DEPARTMENT AND IN THE INTERIM, IF WE NEED TO APPOINT, UM, THE DEPUTY CITY ATTORNEY ON AN INTERIM, I'M OKAY WITH THAT AS A COMPROMISE, BUT REGARDLESS OF WHETHER OR NOT THE CITY MANAGER FINDS A FOURTH POSITION, UM, I'M IN FAVOR OF HAVING A PERMANENT DIRECTOR, UH, COMING TO COME FROM THE HR DEPARTMENT. IT'S NOTED. OKAY. THANK YOU, INTERIM DIRECTOR AT THIS TIME, AT THIS TIME, I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION FOR A TEMPORARY APPOINTMENT. UM, FOR THE CIVIL SERVICE DIRECTOR'S POSITION, I COMMISSIONED A WANDA JOHNSON WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE ENTERTAIN OR ACCEPT, UH, THE TEMPORARY POSITION, UH, OF, UH, IS IT, UM, CITY ATTORNEY OR JUNIOR ASSOCIATE ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY MONIQUE NUNEZ GARZA. OKAY. UH, AS TEMPORARY, UNTIL WE ARE ABLE TO SECURE THAT POSITION, UH, A PERMANENT POSITION FROM THE HR DEPARTMENT, SECOND COMMISSIONER WATSON, I SECOND, THE MOTION IS PROPERLY MOVED. AND SECOND THAT THE DEPUTY CITY ATTORNEY WILL TEMPORARILY FIELD THE CIVIL SERVICE DIRECTOR POSITION UNTIL HR OPENING HIS FIELD. AT WHICH TIME THAT POSITION WILL TRANSITION BACK OVER TO THE HUMAN RESOURCES DEPARTMENT READINESS. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION INDICATE YOUR PREFERENCE BY SAYING AYE, ALL OPPOSED MOTION CARRIES. OKAY. UM, THERE WAS NOTHING ELSE. I SEE YOU. I WOULD ENTERTAIN A MOTION FOR A GERMAN, IF THERE'S ANY, DID THE COMMISSIONERS HAVE ANY ANNOUNCEMENTS? I THINK WE HAD AN, THEN WE [01:05:01] ALSO HAVE A CLOSED EXECUTIVE SESSION AS WELL. I'M SORRY. WELL, I DON'T THINK THERE'S ANYTHING WE NEED TO HAVE, UM, IN CLOSED SESSION. AM I CORRECT? NO. NO. OKAY. UM, ARE THEY IN ANNOUNCEMENTS [7. CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION ANNOUNCEMENTS] FROM THE COMMISSION? THE ONLY ANNOUNCEMENT THAT I HAVE IS I'M WITH THE, THE DATES THAT WE HAVE SCHEDULED ALL THE MINES AND THE 30TH IS THAT SET IN STONE. AND THE REASON WHY I SAY THAT IS BECAUSE AS A FEDERAL MEDIATOR, I, I WILL GET SOME CASES AND I DON'T WANT THAT TO CONFLICT. SO IF IT'S SET IN STONE, I CAN, I CAN LET THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT KNOW THAT I CAN'T BE AVAILABLE ON THOSE DATES. IT WOULD JUST DEPEND ON THE COMMISSIONS AVAILABILITY. IF, UM, IF YOU COULD ALL BE AVAILABLE ON THE NINTH AND 30TH, THEN, UM, WE WOULD SCHEDULE IT. OKAY. IN, IN, IN YOUR ABSENCE. UM, LAST MONTH WE TOOK LIBERTY TO, TO, TO APPOINT THOSE DATES. THAT'S FINE. AND I CAN, AS LONG AS IT'S SET THE NINTH AND THE 30TH, I COULD JUST LET THEM KNOW I'M NOT AVAILABLE ON THOSE DATES. YEAH. THERE'S ONE OTHER QUESTION THAT I HAVE COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS, IF THAT'S OKAY. UM, IS THERE A BUDGET FOR THIS COMMISSION AND IT'S SPECIFICALLY, IS THERE A BUDGET FOR PRINTING DOCUMENTS AT THIS TIME? THERE'S NOT A BUDGET. HOWEVER, IF A COMMISSIONER HAS A PREFERENCE OR HOW HE OR SHE RECEIVES DOCUMENTS, WE WILL CERTAINLY TAKE THAT UNDER ADVISEMENT AND PROVIDE YOU WITH DOCUMENTS IN THE MANNER IN WHICH YOU WOULD LIKE TO RECEIVE. I COMMISSIONED A WANDA JOHNSON WOULD LIKE MY DOCUMENTS PRINTED. I THINK THAT WOULD JUST BE A GOOD PRACTICE. JUST HAVE THE DOCUMENTS PRINTED FOR, AND THEN I DO HAVE ONE OTHER QUESTION. UM, AS FAR AS CREDENTIALING IS CONCERNED, IS THERE A, IS THERE A PROCEDURAL PROCESS FOR COMMISSIONERS TO BE CREDENTIALED? UM, EITHER SOME TYPE OF IDENTIFICATION, BADGE OR SOMETHING OTHER THAN, OR DO WE NEED TO BE IDENTIFIED? ARE WE IN COGNITO? WE DON'T NEED, THEY DON'T NEED TO KNOW WHAT WE ARE WHEN YOU REFER TO CREDENTIALED WHAT EXACTLY, UM, A BADGER OR HAVE SOMETHING THAT SAYS WE'RE COMMISSIONERS OR THINGS LIKE THAT. I CAN CERTAINLY TALK TO THE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE AND THE CITY SECRETARY'S OFFICE ABOUT WHETHER THERE IS A BUDGET FOR THOSE SORTS OF ITEMS. IF YOU ALL ARE INTERESTED IN THOSE. WELL, I WAS GOING TO SAY, MAYBE WE GOTTA DO ANOTHER SURVEY OF THE OTHER CITIES AND SEE WHAT THEIR BUDGETS LOOK LIKE. WHAT OTHER CREDENTIALING, WHAT OTHER, WHAT OTHER THINGS ARE OUT THERE IN THE, UM, IN THE GOODY BAG WE DON'T KNOW ABOUT. SO, UM, WELL THE IS, THIS IS A LOT OF PAPER, A LOT OF PAPER I'M FORTUNATE THAT I CAN PRINT. OKAY. NOW JOKES ASIDE. ALL RIGHT. IS THERE ANY OTHER MATTERS NEED TO BE BROUGHT BEFORE THE COMMISSION, BEFORE WE MOVE FORWARD GERMAN, I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION FOR A GERMAN. I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE ARE JOINED AT THIS TIME. IF THERE WOULD BE NO FURTHER DISCUSSIONS, MISSION OF WATSON. I SECOND, THE MOTION THEY'RE MOVING PROPERLY. SECOND, THEY WERE ADJOURNED THE CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION MEETING OF JULY 29TH, 2021. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR INDICATION, PREFACE BY SAYING, AND I THANK YOU SO MUCH. * This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting.