2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 2000 1999 1998 1997
Agenda and Notice of Special Meeting
Friday, January 16, 2009
1:00 p.m.
Room 416, City Hall
1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place
|
|
I.
|
Call to Order and Roll Call.
|
|
|
|
|
II.
|
Public Comment on all matters appearing on the Special Meeting Agenda Session.
|
|
|
|
|
III.
|
Challenge to Classification Decision Relating to Q-50 Sergeant Appointments and Assignments Made in August 2007: (1) Decision Whether Assignment to Sergeants of Work Traditionally Performed by Q-35 Assistant Inspectors and 0380 Inspectors as Described in the Class Specifications for those Ranks was Proper under Civil Service Commission Rules; (2) If Not, Decision as to the Appropriate Remedies.(File No. 0268-08-1 ) ACTION ITEM
Continuation of Hearing of Appeals from Q-35 Assistant Inspector Eligibles on List ID 21055 Challenging the Classification Decision and the Q-50 Sergeant Appointments and Assignments and the Failure to Appoint Appellants to Q-35 Assistant Inspector. (File No. 0268-08-1 ) ACTION ITEM
|
|
|
|
|
|
Note: A closed session on this item is possible. A closed session may not be held, but the option to hold a closed session is provided to the Commission.
|
|
|
|
|
|
A)
|
Public Comment on all matters pertaining to the Agenda item and the potential closed session.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
B)
|
Vote on whether to assert the attorney – client privilege and hold closed session to confer with legal counsel pursuant to San Francisco Administrative Code Section 67.10 (d) (2) and California Government Code Section 54956.9 (b) – Conference with Legal Counsel – Anticipated Litigation. (Action Item)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
C)
|
CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – ANTICIPATED LITIGATION - (Discussion and Possible Action Item)
California Government Code Section 54956.9 (b) and San Francisco Administrative Code Section 67.10 (d) (2) – As Defendant; One Case
|
|
|
Note:
|
In addition to raising issues that relate to enforcement of judicial decrees as to which the City is a party in the Officers for Justice litigation (Officers for Justice et al. v Civil Service Commission et al. (N.D.Cal., Case Nos. C73-0657 and C77-2884), this appeal also relates to a recent suit filed against the City in federal court, Stockwell et al. v. CCSF, et al. (N.D.Cal., San Francisco Division, Civ. No. CV 08 5190, filed November 17, 2008), which raises different issues than the appeal.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
D)
|
Reconvene in open session:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1)
|
Vote to elect whether to disclose any or all discussions held in closed session. (San Francisco Administrative Code Section 67.12(a). (Action Item)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2)
|
Disclosure of action taken in closed session pursuant to California Government Code Section 54957.1 (a) and San Francisco Administrative Code Section 67.12(b).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
July 2, 2007:
|
Postpone to the meeting of July 16, 2007 at the request of the appellants.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
July 16, 2007:
|
1. Adopt the report. Sustain the decision of the Human Resources Director; deny the appeal by Mario Machi. Mr. Machi failed to appear.
2. Continue all remaining appeals to the meeting of August 6, 2007.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
August 6, 2007:
|
1. Approve appellant Thomas O'Connor's request to be excused from hearing due to a long standing medical appointment. His appeal will be heard along with the other appeals on the use of the Q-35/0380 Inspector Series at the San Francisco Police Department. (Vote of 4 to 0)
2. Deny appeals without prejudice. Appeals may be brought when a classification decision is made by the Human Resources Director regarding the Q-50 and Q-35/0380 classes. (Vote of 4 to 0)
3. The Commission requested an Opinion of the City Attorney on the jurisdiction of the Court and the Commission to interpret and enforce the Stipulation and Order Re: Selection Procedure for the 1998 Q-35 Assistant Inspector Examination; and to provide guidance on the meaning of certain provisions therein. (Vote of 4 to 0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
April 21, 2008:
|
The Commission directed the Executive Officer to schedule a hearing on the requests for hearing filed. (Vote of 3 to 0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
June 16, 2008:
|
1. A classification action under Civil Service Commission jurisdiction has occurred. (Vote of 4 to 1; Commissioner Becerril dissents.)
2. Appeals of the classification action were timely. (Vote of 5 to 0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Request for Information:
|
The Commission also scheduled a follow-up hearing on August 18, 2008 and requested the following additional information:
1. The Civil Service Commission’s jurisdiction and its ability to interpret various provisions of the Stipulation and Order issued by the Court on October 26, 1998, regarding the selection process of the Q-35 examination and other related orders terminating the Consent Decree.
2. A briefing of Administrative Code Sections 2A.75 through 2A.78 on the powers of the Chief of Police and Police Commission to reorganize the department and make assignments.
3. The specific job duties of the Q-35, Q-50, and 0380 positions and their similarities and differences.
4. What remedies does the Civil Service Commission have at its disposal in this situation?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
August 4, 2008:
|
Postpone to September 15, 2008; City Attorney to provide the opinion including the status of the Q-35 List ID 21055 and other information requested from departments. (Vote of 3 to 1; Vice President Gorrono dissents.)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
September 22, 2008:
|
1) The 1998 Q-35 Assistant Inspector Eligible List is still in effect. (Vote of 3 to 0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Statement of President Casper on his vote
|
In their written submissions to this Commission, the Department of Human Resources and the Police Department have argued that this Commission has no jurisdiction to interpret the October 26, 1998, Stipulation and Order regarding selection procedure for the 1998 Q-35 Assistant Inspector examination, which Stipulation and Order was entered by the Federal District Court in the Consent Decree litigation. No, we do not have jurisdiction to interpret the Court’s order. However, the Civil Service Commission was a party to that litigation; the Civil Service Commission was the first named defendant. Consequently, the Civil Service Commission is of course bound by all orders of the Court entered in that litigation. While it is not within our jurisdiction to interpret the Court’s order, we have the task of determining what are our responsibilities and duties under the Order. If the Order applies to us, we must take action in compliance with the Order.
Now the Order affects the Q-35 list in several ways. The principal way in which the Order affects the Q-35 list is the list’s duration. Its duration, as stated by the Court, is not without ambiguity. It can be read in several ways. One way is this: the Q-35 list shall remain in effect for four (4) years. However, if and when a new Q-35 list is adopted, whether before the expiration of four (4) years or after four (4) years, the Q-35 list expires. Well, that reading cannot be said to comport with the intentions of the parties. Under that reading, the City could have cut off the list after, let’s say, the expiration of two (2) years by holding another Q-35 examination. That could not have been the intent of the parties at that time.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2a) First is: that the hearing of this matter be continued, and that at a further hearing the Commission address the issues of whether the assignments of the Q-50 Sergeants to work traditionally performed by Q-35 Assistant Inspectors and 0380 Inspectors as described in the class specifications for the latter two ranks were proper. Furthermore, that if the Commission formally finds that the assignments were improper under Civil Service Commission Rules, that the Commission examine and make a decision regarding the appropriate remedies.
2b) Second is: that the Commission ask the Chief of Police, between the date of this hearing and the date of the next hearing on this matter, to refrain from further assigning Q-50 Sergeants to work traditionally performed by Q-35 Assistant Inspectors and 0380 Inspectors, as such work is described in the class specifications for the latter two ranks. (Vote of 3 to 0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
September 29, 2008:
|
Continue the meeting in two (2) weeks and request the Chief of Police to not make Q-50 appointments to traditionally Q-35 Assistant Inspector positions until this matter is resolved. (Vote of 4 to 0)
Note: The Commission directed the Executive Officer to check with Commissioners’ schedules and the availability of a hearing room in scheduling the continued meeting.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
November 24, 2008:
|
Meeting cancelled.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Recommendation:
|
Open for discussion.
|
|
|
|
|
IV.
|
Adjournment.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Please Note:
|
Non-privileged explanatory documents will be made available for public inspection at the Civil Service Commission office located at 25 Van Ness Avenue, Suite 720, San Francisco, CA 94102, Monday through Friday, 8:00 to 5:00 p.m.
|
Posted 1/6/09
NOTICE OF COMMISSION HEARING POLICIES AND PROCEDURES
A. Commission Office
The Civil Service Commission office is located at, 25 Van Ness Avenue, Suite 720, San Francisco, CA 94102. The telephone number is (415) 252-3247. The fax number is (415) 252-3260 and the web address is www.sfgov.org/civil_service/. Office hours are from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday.
B. Policy Requiring Written Reports
It is the policy of the Civil Service Commission that except for appeals filed under Civil Service Commission Rule 111A Position-Based Testing, all items appearing on its agenda be supported by a written report prepared by Commission or departmental staff. All documents referred to in any Agenda Document are posted adjacent to the Agenda, or if more than one (1) page in length, available for public inspection and copying at the Civil Service Commission office. Reports from City and County personnel supporting agenda items are submitted in accordance with the procedures established by the Executive Officer. Reports not submitted according to procedures, in the format and quantity required, and by the deadline, will not be calendared.
C. Policy on Written Submissions by Appellants
All written material submitted by appellants to be considered by the Commission in support of an agenda item shall be submitted to the Commission office, no later than 5:00 p.m. on the fourth (4th) business day preceding the Commission meeting for which the item is calendared (ordinarily, on Tuesday). An original and nine (9) copies on 8 1/2-inch X 11 inch paper, three-hole punched on left margin, and page numbered in the bottom center margin, shall be provided. Written material submitted for the Commission’s review becomes part of a public record and shall be open for public inspection.
D. Policy and Procedure for Hearings to be Scheduled after 5:00 p.m. and Requests for Postponement
A request to hear an item after 5:00 p.m. should be directed to the Executive Officer as soon as possible following the receipt of notification of an upcoming hearing. Requests may be made by telephone at (415) 252-3247 and confirmed in writing or by fax at (415) 252-3260.
A request for a postponement (continuance) to delay an item to another meeting may be directed to the Commission
Executive Officer by telephone or in writing. Before acting, the Executive Officer may refer certain requests to another City official for recommendation. Telephone requests must be confirmed in writing prior to the meeting. Immediately following the “Announcement of Changes” portion of the agenda at the beginning of the meeting, the Commission will consider a request for a postponement that has been previously denied. Appeals filed under Civil Service Commission Rule 111A Position-Based Testing shall be considered on the date it is calendared for hearing except under extraordinary circumstances and upon mutual agreement between the appellant and the Department of Human Resources.
E. Policy and Procedure on Hearing Items Out of Order
Requests to hear items out of order are to be directed to the Commission President at the beginning of the agenda. The President will rule on each request. Such requests may be granted with mutual agreement among the affected parties.
F. Procedure for Commission Hearings
All Commission hearings on disputed matters shall conform to the following procedures: The Commission reserves the right to question each party during its presentation and, in its discretion, to modify any time allocations and requirements.
If a matter is severed from the Consent Agenda or the Ratification Agenda, presentation by the opponent will be for a maximum time limit of five (5) minutes and response by the departmental representative for a maximum time limit of five (5) minutes.
For items on the Regular Agenda, presentation by the departmental representative for a maximum time of five (5) minutes and response by the opponent for a maximum time limit of five (5) minutes.
For items on the Separations Agenda, presentation by the department followed by the employee or employee’s
representative shall be for a maximum time limit of ten (10) minutes for each party unless extended by the Commission. Each presentation shall conform to the following:
-
Opening summary of case (brief overview);
-
Discussion of evidence;
-
Corroborating witnesses, if necessary; and
-
Closing remarks.
The Commission may allocate five (5) minutes for each side to rebut evidence presented by the other side.
G. Policy on Tape Recording of Commission Meetings
As provided in the San Francisco Sunshine Ordinance, all Commission meetings are tape-recorded. These tape recordings of open sessions are available for public review starting on the day after the Commission meeting in the Commission office between 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m.
H. Speaking before the Civil Service Commission
Speaker cards are not required. The Commission will take public comment on all items appearing on the agenda at the beginning of each meeting at the time the item is heard and prior to the Commission taking any action on the item. The Commission will take public comment on matters not on the Agenda, but within the jurisdiction of the Commission during the “Requests to Speak” portion of the regular meeting. Maximum time will be three (3) minutes.
I. Policy on use of Cell Phones, Pagers and Similar Sound-Producing Electronic Devices at and During Public Meetings
The ringing and use of cell phones, pagers and similar sound-producing electronic devices are prohibited at this meeting. Please be advised that the Chair may order the removal from the meeting room of any person(s) responsible for the ringing or use of a cell phone, pager, or other similar sound-producing electronic devices.
Information on Disability Access
The Civil Service Commission normally meets in Room 400 (Fourth Floor) City Hall, 1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place. However, meetings not held in this room are conducted in the Civic Center area. City Hall is wheelchair accessible. The closest accessible BART station is the Civic Center, located 2 ½ blocks from City Hall. Accessible MUNI lines serving City Hall are 47 Van Ness Avenue, 9 San Bruno and 71 Haight/Noriega, as well as the METRO stations at Van Ness and Market and at Civic Center. For more information about MUNI accessible services, call (415) 923-6142. Accessible curbside parking has been designated at points in the vicinity of City Hall adjacent to Grove Street and Van Ness Avenue.
The following services are available on request 48 hours prior to the meeting; except for Monday meetings, for which the deadline shall be 4:00 p.m. of the last business day of the preceding week. For American Sign Language interpreters or the use of a reader during a meeting, a sound enhancement system, and/or alternative formats of the agenda and minutes, please contact the Commission office to make arrangements for the accommodation. Late requests will be honored, if possible.
Individuals with severe allergies, environmental illness, multiple chemical sensitivity or related disabilities should call our ADA coordinator at (415) 252-3254 or (415) 252-3247 to discuss meeting accessibility. In order to assist the City’s efforts to accommodate such people, attendees at public meetings are reminded that other attendees may be sensitive to various chemical based products. Please help the City to accommodate these individuals.
Know your Rights under the Sunshine Ordinance (Chapter 67 of the San Francisco Administrative Code)
Government’s duty is to serve the public, reaching its decisions in full view of the public. Commissions, boards,
councils, and other agencies of the City and County exist to conduct the people’s business. This ordinance assures that deliberations are conducted before the people and that City operations are open to the people’s review. For more information on your rights under the Sunshine Ordinance or to report a violation of the ordinance, or to obtain a free copy of the Sunshine Ordinance, contact Frank Darby, Administrator of the Sunshine Ordinance Task Force, 1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place, Room 244, San Francisco, CA 94102-4689 at (415) 554-7724, by fax: (415) 554-7854, by e-mail: sotf@sfgov.org, or on the City’s website at www.sfgov.org/bdsupvrs/sunshine.
San FranciscoLobbyist Ordinance
Individuals and entities that influence or attempt to influence local legislative or administrative action may be required by the San Francisco Lobbyist Ordinance (San Francisco Campaign and Governmental Conduct Code Section 2.100) to
register and report lobbying activity. For more information about the Lobbyist Ordinance, please contact the San Francisco Ethics Commission at 25 Van Ness Ave., Suite 220, San Francisco, CA 94102, telephone (415) 252-3100,
fax (415) 252-3112 and web site http://www.sfgov.org/ethics/.
Materials Distributed to Commissioners After Distribution of Agenda Packet
If any materials related to an item on this agenda have been distributed to the Civil Service Commission after distribution of the agenda packet, those materials are available for public inspection at the Civil Service Commission office, 25 Van Ness Avenue, Suite 720 during normal office hours (8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Monday through Friday).
