Loading...
02-27-1991 THE CITY OF EDGEWATER MERIT BOARD REGULAR MEETING WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 27, 1991 CITY HALL CONFERENCE ROOM MINUTES CALL TO ORDER: The Regular Meeting of the Merit Board was called to order at 7:03 p.m. on Wednesday, February 27, 1991, in the Conference Room of City Hall. ROLL CALL: Members present were: Ms. Cece Stevens, Ms. Karen Grasberger, Ms. Jan Morris, Ms. Shirley Roberts, and Ms. Doris Patterson. Also present were Karen Rickelman and Lisa Kruckmeyer, Recording Secretary. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Ms. Grasberger stated on Page 2 the sentence that reads Ms. Patterson stated he is not Ms. Rickelman's direct supervisor should read Ms. Patterson stated Mr. Johnson is not Ms. Rickelman's direct supervisor. Ms. Grasberger also stated that on Page 3 the sentence that reads Mr. Jones did not accept should read Mr. Jones did not concur. Ms. Patterson stated under Vice Chairman it should state that Ms. Grasberger declined and stated she is only going to be on until June and the Board should think about it. Ms. Patterson stated under Qualification Rating Form the sentence that reads Chairperson Patterson asked if it was brought to any attention of the parties who would have some reason to use it should read Chairperson Patterson asked if it was brought to the attention of the parties who would have some reason to use it. Chairperson Patterson stated the sentence that reads Chairperson Patterson stated in respect to putting it that way, it could be made a requirement that a drug test be taken at the time of a lost injury accident should read that a drug test be taken at the time loss of an injury accident. Chairperson Patterson also stated in the paragraph above adjournment it should be affect not effect. Ms. Grasberger made a motion to approve the minutes as amended, seconded by Ms. Stevens. Motion CARRIED 5 -0. Election of Pro - tempore Chairperson Patterson stated Ms. Grasberger could not be nominated because she is leaving in June and Cece is Acting Chairman if Ms. Patterson is ever sick. Chairperson Patterson explained to the new members what a pro - tempore is. Ms. Stevens nominated Ms. Morris, seconded by Ms. Grasberger. There being no further nominations, it was moved and seconded to close nominations. Motion CARRIED 4 -1. Ms. Morris declined. Review of New Position Descriptions Chairperson Patterson stated they were the kind of descriptions found in the Cody Report. Chairperson Patterson stated in Mr. Johnson's letter he states each position was approved as to the funding in the City's budget and the positions were overlooked in making copies of the study. Ms. Roberts stated she had a problem with the fact that they require credentialing for the Building and Maintenance Foreman and yet the Police Lieutenant doesn't need any experience much less credentials. Ms. Rickelman stated it looked like something was left out. Ms. Grasberger stated the minimum qualifications are included in the other three descriptions. Chairperson Patterson stated they would need to make a motion to request from Mr. Johnson a complete description of the Police Lieutenant. Ms. Stevens so moved, seconded by Ms. Morris. Motion CARRIED 5 -0. Mrs. Roberts stated this is more of a position specification and not really a position description. She stated that is what she uses when they actually draw up a position description. She also stated there is nothing in the description that says and other duties as assigned. She asked if it was their job to question the format. Chairperson Patterson stated not the format; it was a study that was done. Ms. Morris stated in the Cody report all of them have grades and classes but there aren't any on the job descriptions provided by Mr. Johnson. Ms. Stevens asked if the grades and classes were on another page. The Secretary stated it was. Ms. Rickelman stated if the Merit Board is going to accept these job descriptions, she would want to know what each grade is for each position. She stated she would want some comparison of one description compared to other positions in that area. Chairperson Patterson stated with all due respect and in following Roberts Rules she would have to limit Ms. Rickelman's comments until Citizen Comments. Ms. Grasberger read Page 15 Salary Ranges and Progression. The Board went on to discuss the way the Cody Report was done. Ms. Morris asked how come there is no particular grade assigned to the new job classifications. Ms. Grasberger stated up until this point they have not been incorporated in the Cody Report. Ms. Grasberger made a motion to request further clarification regarding the classification of the specific grade assignments for each position description, seconded by Ms. Stevens. Motion CARRIED 5 -0. Review of recent amendments and resolutions concerning Section 13 -25 (i) and 13 -26 Chairperson Patterson read Section 13 -25 Adoption of rules and regulations. She stated this clearly states the personnel officer with the Merit Board together may present this manual of rules and regulations. She stated based on this comment they should work together with the Personnel Officer. Ms. Roberts asked if the Volusia County Public Employees Association represents the employees of the City of Edgewater. Page 2 Merit Board February 27, 1991 400 4010 Chairperson Patterson stated in talking with Mr. Johnson there are three union contracts. She stated some of the questions they need to get clarified involve the fact that there are three different contracts with the City. The Merit Board is trying to learn how they fit into the picture. She stated in reading these sections, she thinks they are very pertinent and a key point in this issue. Ms. Roberts stated she asked because doesn't the union enter into some of these things. Chairperson Patterson stated there are some cases where these things are true and the Board needs to know how to work within the system. She went on to read Section 13 -26 Amendments of rules and regulations. Ms. Grasberger stated she would like to make a recommendation to invite Mr. Johnson on a more frequent basis so that they can become more familiar with each other, _and p o t to come together only when there is a grievance. Ms. Stevens made a motion to send a memo of invitation to Mr. Johnson requesting his presence, seconded by Ms. Grasberger. Motion CARRIED 5 -0. Ms. Grasberger stated the Board will never move forward until they can understand how Mr. Johnson has to change hats. Chairperson Patterson stated they need to know the moves he is making so the Board can make the same moves with him and not fight each other when in fact they should be working together. Drug Testing for Employees Chairperson Patterson stated she did not have her notes with her when she spoke to Mr. Johnson. Ms. Stevens made a motion to table this subject until Chairperson Patterson could speak to Mr. Johnson, seconded by Ms. Morris. Motion CARRIED 5 -0. NEW BUSINESS: Welcoming two new members Chairperson Patterson introduced the two new members, Ms. Jan Morris and Ms. Shirley Roberts. Chairperson Patterson explained that under the Sunshine Law they can talk to anyone outside the group about what they do because it is public information, but they can not talk to each other about the issues discussed at the meetings. Chairperson Patterson stated there are some little pamphlets of Roberts Rules of Order that are available in book stores. She suggested reading it in the library or getting a feel for it especially in regards to making motions. Chairperson Patterson stated she is making available to everyone a copy of the Merit System. She stated the Merit System explains how much of a raise someone gets for a certain percentage. Ms. Stevens stated they already have a copy of that. Chairperson Patterson asked if it was in the Cody Report. The Secretary stated yes it is. Page 3 Merit Board February 27, 1991 Ms. Grasberger stated Ms. Stevens was responsible for the Board even getting the percentages. Ms. Stevens stated you can sort of see a pattern with who is always getting 2% and who is always getting 4 %. DISCUSSION ITEMS Memo to Mr. Johnson requesting legal clarification Chairperson Patterson stated they found through a request from Ms. Rickelman's that the Code Book is not clear as to the Merit Board duties. In order to be fair and legally correct they are going to prepare a memo to find out what the Board's job is. Chairperson Patterson read the sentence in Section 23 in the Charter that pertains to the Merit Board. She read he shall furnish the city council, its several members, the head of any department, or any officer or board not included in any department, his opinion on any question of law relating to their respective powers and duties. Chairperson Patterson explained Section 39A the Merit Board. She read the first sentence in the second paragraph in Section 39A. She stated they have to remember that the Merit Board was established in 1975 long before there was a City Manager. The issue between City Manager operations and Merit Board has never been clarified. Ms. Grasberger stated the last sentence in that paragraph proved not to be true the last time Ms. Rickelman came before the board. Ms. Grasberger read the sentence. Ms. Grasberger stated they made a decision however they were apprised of the fact that their decision had no validity at that point in time. Chairperson Patterson stated this needs to be clarified and they need legal advice because they can't keep people in limbo with their problems. Ms. Roberts asked if the duties of the City Manager are written in such manner that they are in conflict with this. Ms. Grasberger stated a City Manager /Council type government is different than what they had before. They had a City Manager when this was in full affect. Ms. Grasberger stated the biggest problem is the board members are not there long enough. Chairperson Patterson stated the next section is Sec. 13 -22 Organization for personnel administration. She read Section (b). She went on to read Section (c)(3) and Section (c)(7). The Board then went on to discuss the problems Mrs. Rickelman had with her appeal. Ms. Grasberger stated Ms. Rickelman's supervisor should be the one making the appeal. Ms. Roberts asked if most City Manager's are Personnel Directors. She stated she thinks it would be a conflict of interest. Chairperson Patterson stated it is a separate problem and yes it is a conflict of interest. Ms. Grasberger stated it is something the board can not address. Chairperson Patterson then read Section 24 (f) and (g). She stated the Personnel Officer's job is to prepare for review classifications in his capacity as personnel officer. Page 4 Merit Board February 27, 1991 4100 410 Ms. Grasberger stated as a board they need to go back through Mr. Johnson with anything that they are going to do. Preparation of memo requesting legal clarification Chairperson Patterson stated the basic question in the memo to the City Attorney is does the board have a right to review Mrs. Rickelman's request.. She stated the other focus that she thought of was Mr. Johnson acting in capacity as City Manager or Personnel Officer when he rejected her request or was he both. Ms. Grasberger stated he didn't reject hers he rejected the recommendation of Mr. Munoz. Chairperson Patterson started the memo with the City of Edgewater Chairman & members of the Merit Board request legal clarification of Attachment A of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Edgewater. Ms. Grasberger asked if in addition to providing her with copies of this, they should provide her with a copy of the problem with regards to Karen Rickelman. Chairperson Patterson started the second paragraph with this came to our attention through a request from Mrs. Karen Rickelman for a review by the Merit Board of the denial of her grade reclassification. See Attachment B. Chairperson Patterson started the third paragraph with this has become a problem due to the fact that the Merit Board was in existence prior to the City Manager form of government. There is also the consideration that the City Manager serves as the Personnel Officer. Ms. Grasberger stated the last paragraph should read this has become a problem due to the fact that the Merit Board duties as outlined in Attachment A were in existence prior to the City Manager form of government. Chairperson Patterson stated they need to address they are aware the Council is currently revising the Charter and that we work from the existing Charter. Chairperson Patterson stated she would like to give the Secretary a week to look at it and she would like the members to come by and read it for themselves. She stated she would like the memo to go out before the next meeting. Ms. Grasberger asked if a draft can be made of the memo. Ms. Roberts asked if it would be possible for the Secretary to send her a copy. The Secretary stated she would. Ms. Stevens made a motion to prepare the memo addressing it to the City Attorney, seconded by Ms. Grasberger. Motion CARRIED S- O. CITIZENS COMMENTS Ms. Rickelman stated as far as the new Charter goes, she has seen the proposals on the new Charter and the only change that was made with the Merit Board was that there will be two employee members instead of one. Chairperson Patterson asked when that will go into effect. Ms. Rickelman stated it has to be voted on. Page 5 Merit Board February 27, 1991 Ms. Stevens asked when that vote is supposed to be. Ms. Rickelman stated she didn't know. Ms. Stevens asked if it was going to be yes or no. Ms. Rickelman stated she didn't have any idea. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to discuss, Ms. Grasberger made a motion to adjourn, seconded by Ms. Morris. The meeting was adjourned at B:34 p.m. Minutes submitted by: Lisa Kruckmeyer Page 6 Merit Board February 27, 1991