HomeMy WebLinkAbout2003-01-20 MINUTES OF A SPECIAL CALLED MEETING
OF THE
CITY OF EULESS CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION
JANUARY 20,2003
CALL TO ORDER
A special meeting of the Euless Civil Service Commission was called to order by Chairperson Carla
Shields at 10:12am, on Monday, January 20, 2003, in the Council Chambers.
Commission Members Present
Carla Shields
Harold Samuels
Robert Bouse
Staff Members Present
Joe Hennig, City Manager
Gary McKamie, Deputy City Manager
Lee Koontz, Fire Chief
Tammy Money, HR& Risk Administrator/Civil Service Officer
Paul Wieneskie, Assistant City Attorney
Anniece McKanna. HR/Benefits Technician/Staff Secretary for the Civil Service Commission
Loretta Getchell, Director of Fiscal & Administrative Services
Jeff Morris, Fire EMS/Battalion Chief
Jerry Sutton, Fire Lieutenant
Rick Clark, Fire Lieutenant
Keith Smith, Fire Captain
Visitors Present
Tom Taylor, Representative of Texas State Firefighter's Association
Carl Tyson, Mayor Pro Tern
Chairperson Shields introduced the Commission members. She expressed appreciation to all those
involved in preparing for the hearing. A motion was made by Mr. Samuels and seconded by Mr. Bouse to
approve the minutes from the previous meeting of February 21, 2001. Being no discussion, the
Commissioners unanimously approved the minutes.
Mrs. Shields explained that the reason for this meeting was to conduct a hearing of an appeal by Jerry
Sutton, employee of the City of Euless. She introduced Paul Wieneskie, Assistant City Attorney, who
would be advising the Commissioners. After expressing appreciation for the preparation involved for this
meeting, she asked for each party's presentation to be limited to approximately 20 minutes and for the
presentation to not become adversarial. The Commissioners would be able to ask questions at any time
during the presentations.
Page 2 of 8
City of Euless Civil Service Commission Hearing—January 20,2003
Tammy Money,Civil Service Officer,was asked to present a background leading up to this hearing. Mrs.
Money explained the Human Resources Department posted the signup sheets for the eligibility lists for the
Fire Captain's promotional exam on February 28, 2002, in the three fire stations and Fire Administration.
Mrs. Money further indicated on April 12, 2002, the signup sheets were returned to Human Resources
indicating two candidates from Group I and one candidate from Group 1(a). On May 30, 2002, the
Captain's written promotional test was conducted at which time one candidate from Group I passed and
one candidate from Group 1(a) passed. On June 1, 2002, the two candidates proceeded to the tactical
assessment portion of the exam. On June 3, 2002, Human Resources received the final scores from the
tactical assessment portion of the exam. Those scores were combined with the written assessment and
given a final score.
The Captain's eligibility list was posted on June 4, 2002, with Keith Smith in the first position and Jerry
Sutton in the second position.
Mrs. Money mentioned that in December, 2002, as a result of a retirement of a Battalion Chief in the Fire
Department, a Fire Captain was promoted to the position of Battalion Chief which created a vacancy as a
Fire Captain. At that time, it was announced that Fire Lieutenant Keith Smith would be promoted to the
Fire Captain position because he was the top candidate on the Captain's promotion eligibility list.
On December 10,Mr. Sutton filed his appeal with Fire Chief Lee Koontz regarding the promotion. Chief
Koontz and Mr. Sutton met on December 20 at which time Chief Koontz gave his written decision to
uphold the promotion of Keith Smith to Fire Captain.
Mr. Sutton filed his appeal with City Manager Joe Hennig on December 26, 2002. Mr. Hennig had a
hearing with Mr. Sutton on January 3, 2003. Mr. Hennig upheld the decision to promote Keith Smith to
Fire Captain.
On January 7, 2003, Mr. Sutton filed his appeal with the City of Euless Civil Service Commission. Once
the Civil Service Commission renders a decision,Mr. Sutton's next step would be to file an appeal with the
Euless City Council.
Chairperson Shields thanked Mrs. Money and invited Mr. Taylor, representative of Mr. Sutton, to begin
his presentation.
Mr. Taylor distributed handouts/exhibits to the Commissioners indicated there is plenty of evidence
available to indicate Mr. Sutton should have been promoted. He is not recommending demotion of Mr.
Smith, but promotion of Jerry Sutton. The problem seems to be with Section 4.02 of the City of Euless
Civil Service Rules and Regulations which indicates a minimum requirement of three candidates to
conduct a test. If that number is not reached, then candidates from next lower level are eligible to sit for
the exam. His interpretation is that "eligibility to sit for a test" and "eligibility to promote" are two
different things. Section 4.02 establishes who is eligible and who can take the test. Section D states who
can sit for and take the exam.There were two candidates from Group I and one candidate from Group 1(a)
sat for the exam. Only one Group I member passed and one Group 1(a) member passed. The promotion
testing continued to the next step.After the exam was completed,an Eligibility List was established based
on Section 4.08 which ranks the scores. The list is then distributed to the candidates. The Chief then
promoted from the ranking of the eligibility list. What the Chief did not consider was Section 4.17 which
Page 3 of 8
City of Euless Civil Service Commission Hearing—January 20,2003
states that promotion eligibility lists consist of the names of employees who are duly qualified for higher
level promotions. Lieutenant Sutton was the only one on the list who was duly qualified to promote,
according to Section 4.17. According to the records Mr. Taylor received, the Group 1(a) Lieutenant was
nine months shy of qualification of when he took the test and three months shy of the time the promotion
was made.
Mr. Taylor further noted that municipalities are required to classify each position. On the administrative
exhibit on "Rules of Conduct, Regulations, Job Descriptions", the job requirements for Fire Captain are
described.Page 3 under"Other Requirements of the Job",the first sentence states that the candidate"must
have served a minimum of two(2)years in the position of Lieutenant". This is important because the fire
department is a "para-military" type of organization; it is imperative that a person receive the training of
the lower position. The Captain is in a position of authority and responsibility at fires (which is primary)
and at fire stations. A Lieutenant is the first step of the officer's rank; that's where you learn the
responsibilities and authorities of those obligations. The two-year requirement in the lower position is a
minimum requirement, as stated in the job description. The importance of the training at the lower level
cannot be overemphasized enough.
He also referred to Page 1, "Job Summary" and "Job Duties" sections of the job description as it relates to
the commanding officer and in serving in the absence of a higher ranking classification. A person must
learn every step in the position. That is why the two-year minimum qualification is so important and is
written in the job description and in Section 4.17.
There are at least six other requirements mentioned on Page 3 of the job description where the word
"must" is used. All the requirements are important. Failure to maintain any of the requirements may lead
to termination or disciplinary action.
According to Section 4.17, promotional eligibility lists shall consist of the names of the duly-qualified
candidates for the higher position. Under Black's Law Dictionary, the term "duly-qualified" means that
the officer will possess every qualification. He shall, in all aspects, comply with every requisite before
entering on the duties of the office.
Mr. Taylor indicated that it appeared the procedures were followed properly. His concern is regarding
Section 4.17 and that the citizens of the City of Euless would want their officers to be duly qualified. His
resolution would be to promote Mr. Sutton to the rank of Captain effective December 15, the date the
position opened and be given full status as required.
Commissioner Samuels inquired as to Mr. Sutton's position that the other candidate (Mr. Smith) should
have been allowed to test, but not allowed to promote, based on the two-year time qualification. Mr.
Taylor agreed and indicated this situation is not unusual. His experience from serving other cities around
Texas is generally that candidates are put on lists and then promoted when they become eligible and meet
the qualifications.
Commissioner Bouse asked if,prior to the test, Mr. Sutton knew that Candidate 1(a)did not have his two
years. If so, did he have the understanding that the other candidate would not be promoted until
qualifications were met.
Mr. Sutton indicated that a question that had arisen regarding certification on exams given to lower-ranks.
Page 4 of 8
City of Euless Civil Service Commission Hearing—January 20,2003
He discussed the situation with Chief Koontz and felt the situation with job descriptions and certifications
were taken care of and that the other candidate would not be promoted until minimum qualification had
been met.
Mr. Taylor indicated that this situation materialized when the promotion took place on December 30.
Mr. Wieneskie inquired as to their interpretation of the rule allowing the dropping down a grade. This
would seem to annul the provisions of Section 4.02D. The candidate would be eligible for promotion
when he reached his two year anniversary date. The conflict appears to be between Sections 4.02D and
Section 4.17.
Mr. Taylor stated that his interpretation was persons can sit for a test, but must be duly-qualified in order
to promote.
Chairperson Shield's asked for Mr. McKamie, Mr. Koontz, and Mr. Hennig to make the City's
presentation within the total twenty-minute timeframe.
Deputy City Manager Gary McKamie explained the City's understanding over the last 30 years of Civil
Service. He declared that we are not"state civil service";we are "city civil service". He indicated that Mr.
Taylor may be more familiar with state civil service, firefighter's union,and state firefighters association.
Our civil service system is exclusive to the City of Euless. We are proud of Mr. Sutton and Mr. Smith.
However, our purpose is to administer the Civil Service Rules and Regulations as we see them, based on
the intent of the Civil Service Commission and City Council when the rules were drafted over a thirty year
period, whether we agree or disagree with them
In 1973, Mayor Harold Samuels and Mayor Pro Tern Willie Mae McCormick played key roles in
establishing the Civil Service Rules and Regulations. Prior to that time, we had a typical "good o' boy"
system like many other small communities. The persons who received promotions were often the ones
who had been here the longest, who fished with the Police Chief, or who played golf with the Fire Chief.
We were fortunate to recognize that promotions should be based on abilities,not how long you have been
on the job. Our Civil Service System was loosely based on State Civil Service, which had been in place
for about 50 years. One concept was for a competitive examination. Another concept was to have
someone to compete with. Being a small city, often there were not enough candidates to compete. So a
provision was placed within our system which required multiple candidates to make a competitive exam.
There were provisions that referenced that the City Manager may choose from the top three candidates
certified by the Civil Service Commission. So we believe the number has always been three.
The Police and Fire Departments have used the Civil Service System most due to their para-military
organization and their need for promotional exams. The last re-write was in 1998 and was led primarily by
Police Chief Gary McKamie, the Police Association President, Fire Chief Lee Koontz, the Fire
Association President, Civil Service Officer Manager Ruth Alley, and Attorney Paul Wieneskie. The
intent was to clarify these rules so there would be no misunderstanding or disputes.
Mr. McKamie explained the rank structure of the Fire Department. The groups [Group I, Group 1(a), and
Group II] are comprised of the people below the rank being tested. In this case, Group I candidates were
all Lieutenants who met all the requirements and qualifications, including time in grade. Group 1(a)
Page 5 of 8
City of Euless Civil Service Commission Hearing—January 20,2003
candidates met all the requirements and qualifications,except the time in grade. Group II candidates were
Driver/Engineers who met all the requirements and qualifications, including time in grade. At the time of
the 1998 re-write,the committee went to great lengths to identify who was qualified to test. There had to
be three candidates to take the exam, or the exam would be cancelled. If there were less than three
candidates from Group I who appeared to take the exam, then Group 1(a) candidates could test. This is
what occurred on May 30, 2002. The test was administered, both written and assessment center; results
were posted;and eligibility list was established for all qualified candidates.Mr. Taylor addresses qualified
candidates from the State Civil Service standpoint in that candidates can take a test, but they cannot be
promoted unless they meet all qualifications. That is not the case within the Euless Civil Service. The
Captain's exam was administered totally within the provisions of the Civil Service Rules.
Mr. McKamie further mentioned the reference to "may" and "must" by Mr. Taylor and Mr. Sutton.
According to Section 4.02, there is no doubt that the candidate must meet the minimum requirements
listed in the job description. However, if you don't have three candidates who meet that criteria,there is a
provision to drop down to the next group. It is not a"may" situation. The job description is established by
the Department Head, as guidelines for the department. It is not ratified by the City Council or Civil
Service Commission. The Civil Service Rules are approved by the City Manager, Civil Service
Commission,and City Council. Those rules take precedence over the job description because they have to
be approved by a higher authority. The comments in Mr. Sutton's letter alludes to the fact that the first
sentence in Section 4.02 should take precedence over the descriptions listed in the remainder of the
language in the Section.
Mr. McKamie distributed a copy from the State Civil Service in reference to Fire Department
Promotional Exams. The basic rules are the same as ours in that candidates must have two years in
service, and you can drop down to a next level if there are not enough qualified candidates. Criminal law
also has exceptions and qualifiers.
These rules are exclusive to the City of Euless, not a state-wide system. We are indebted to the City
founders and leaders through the years for giving us these rules.
Fire Chief Lee Koontz stated that Lt. Sutton did come to his office and asked if we would follow the job
descriptions on the promotional exams. He did not clarify or go any further and did not state anything
about comments made by another candidate on another exam. Based only on his question,and my having
no knowledge of another candidate's comments, "Yes" was the only response to use the job descriptions
to establish the groups. His interpretation is that the eligibility list posted by HR(and presented to him)is
accurate according to Civil Service promotional guidelines as to whom is duly qualified for promotion.
Without justification, and experience is sometimes difficult to measure, he felt he had no right to pass
over one candidate for another.Mr. Smith obviously scored higher on the exam;therefore,Mr. Smith was
promoted to Captain. There is a probationary period for all new appointments to a position.According to
Chief Koontz,there was a lengthy meeting with Mr. Sutton and Division Chief Morris. At that time, Lt.
Sutton stated he understood the Civil Service process,he just didn't agree with it.Chief Koontz stated that
he agreed that the process was handled correctly and the promotion was made according to Civil Service.
City Manager Joe Hennig thanked the Commissioner for holding this hearing and indicated that the Civil
Service is a process we hold dear and do not take lightly. The Commission meets infrequently; however,
we take the decisions very seriously. He felt the City Administration do a very good job in administering
the Civil Service guidelines as they are meant to be administered. This is an unusual case in that there is a
Page 6 of 8
City of Euless Civil Service Commission Hearing—January 20,2003
job description issue. However, Section 4.02 clearly relates to the process used if less than three
candidates sign up. Mr. Hennig felt that Mr. Taylor's opinion would be to disregard the names on the
eligibility list unless the candidate meets all criteria listed in the job description, including time in grade.
All the other exceptions listed in Section 4.02 should not be considered.
Mr. Hennig further mentioned the Civil Service Rules and Regulations were formally adopted on
December 8, 1998. At that time, Section 4.02.D.1, 2, and 3 were expanded and examples were given. The
purpose of this section of the Rules and Regulations was an effort to clarify the promotional process if a
situation like this arose. We understand that Mr. Sutton has a very strong opinion. The opinion of the
administration is that the guidelines were followed in the testing process. The Civil Service Rules and
Regulations is the source of the testing guidelines.
Chairperson Shields asked if Mr. Smith was on probation; she asked if the probation was due to the
promotion or if he lacked experience on the job. She also asked if a Fire Lieutenant who had been on the
job fewer than two years would be duly qualified as a Fire Captain.
Chief Koontz indicated that he was on a 12-month probationary period,as are all new candidates in a new
position. He also responded that he thought the candidate was duly qualified to be Captain;the candidate
was two months short of the two years.
Chairperson Shields directed that Mr. Sutton or his representative would have a five-minute rebuttal
period.
Mr.Taylor wanted to mention that he had experience dealing with many other civil service organizations,
not just the State.He agrees that certain members should be allowed to sit for a test;but he stated that only
duly qualified candidates would be eligible to promote. He further indicated that, before we promote,
someone should read Section 4.17 to determine who is "duly qualified" to promote.That is also stated in
the job requirements. Only one member was duly qualified to promote; the other member will be duly
qualified when the other minimum"must"requirements are met. As far as a Lieutenant being qualified to
serve as Captain,the Lieutenant becomes"duly qualified"by serving as a Lieutenant for two years.That is
why it is an important minimum requisite in the job description. The information prior to Section 4.17
speaks only to who is eligible to sit for an exam. Section 4.17 refers to the fact that only qualified people
should promote. Because this is a serious job, he further indicated we owe it to the citizens to have duly
qualified officers in positions. Promotions are important because more responsibility is accepted. Mr.
Sutton was the candidate duly qualified to promote.
Mr. Wieniskie asked Mr. Taylor about the interplay in the language between Section 4.17 regarding"duly
qualified" and Section 4.02D regarding the ability to drop down to include people who don't have enough
time in grade. Mr. Wieniskie remarked that Mr. Taylor's opinion was that candidates can sit for the exam
and be placed on the eligibility list; however, only duly qualified candidates can promote. The City's
opinion differs in that they focus on Section 4.02 that qualified candidates must meet the minimum
requirements as stated in the job description.With that interpretation,the other information in Section 4.02
regarding dropping down would be annulled.
Mr. Taylor responded that his interpretation of Section 4.02 only refers to who is eligible to sit for exams;
it does not cover who is eligible to promote. He understands the importance of dropping down to lower
levels in order to have three persons test.However, Section 4.17 who is duly qualified to promote. If there
Page 7 of 8
City of Euless Civil Service Commission Hearing—January 20,2003
were three Group I members,this problem would not have occurred. A person could sit for the exam;only
the eligible candidate could promote.
Mr. Hennig mentioned that the City looks at the whole context to get a feel for what the document wants
us to do. The eligibility list certifies who are duly qualified candidates. The contention being presented is
that the other candidates could just"practice". He indicated the list is useless if we are only going to select
the candidate who has two years eligibility. The eligibility and testing process is what is used for
promotion.
Chief Koontz referred to Section 4.08 which states the procedure to follow to establish an eligibility list.
The list of duly qualified candidates was prepared based on the criteria listed in Section 4.02. The testing
procedure was explained to all employees in 1998 that"sit for the test" obviously means "take the exam".
He further mentioned that the candidates would not have wanted to waste their time if they were going to
just"sit"for the exam.Lt. Sutton never asked the question if Mr. Smith was there for a practice test. If Mr.
Smith was only there for a practice test, there would have been no test. He inquired as to the reason Lt.
Sutton would have wasted his time since there were not enough candidates to have the exam.If Mr. Smith
was ineligible, there would have been no reason to test since only two Group I candidates signed up. Lt.
Sutton should have brought up his concern at the time, and the test would have been cancelled.
Chairperson Shields asked if Chief Koontz had ever waited to promote from an unfilled promotion and
left it unfilled for a period of time for lack of a trio of qualified applicants. Chief Koontz indicated that this
situation had not happened during his tenure. There is no Civil Service requirement that a position be
filled, and it does not specify that the position must be filled within a certain period of time. A position
could remain vacant.
Commissioner Bouse inquired as to the Fire Chiefs obligation to always promote the top candidate on the
list as far as the scores were concerned.
Chief Koontz responded that the Civil Service does not mention either/or. In his viewpoint, he further
indicated that if the process was legitimate and candidate was qualified through Civil Service procedures,
he was obligated to take the top candidate.
Mr. Taylor stated that the focus should be on the candidate who should be promoted as listed in Section
4.17.He is not questioning who was qualified to take the exam. Section 4.08 states that the Chief would be
presented with a list of candidates who passed the exam;however,his concern is that Section 4.17 is being
overlooked. His experience has shown that people who have sat for tests were not qualified for
promotions. He stated that he had no doubt that the City acted in its best interest; however, Mr. Sutton
needs clarification on the question that has been raised, "Who looks at Section 4.17?"
There being no additional questions or comments,Chairperson Shields stated that the Commission would
adjourn into Closed Session to deliberate the issues raised, pursuant to Section 551.074 of the Texas
Government Code to discuss "Personnel Matters". Any decisions will be made in "Open Session".
Adjourned to Closed Session at 11:12 am. At 12:10 pm, Chairperson Shields reconvened the Open
Session and asked for a motion regarding the appeal of Jerry Sutton.
Page 8 of 8
City of Euless Civil Service Commission Hearing—January 20,2003
Chairperson Shields made a motion that the appeal of Jerry Sutton be denied,and that the City Manager's
decision regarding this promotion be upheld.
Commissioner Bouse seconded the motion.
Ayes: Chairperson Shields,Commissioner Bouse,and Commissioner Samuels Nays:
None
Chairperson Shields declared the motion carried.
ADJOURNMENT:
Chairperson Shields adjourned the meeting was adjourned at 12:12 p.m.
APPRO D:
d/P ,F
Carla Shields, Chairperson
Date