[00:00:02]
ZOOM, ZOOM HEARINGS.UH, I'M, IT'S, UH, TIME IS NOW
[Civil Service Special Called Meeting on June 27, 2023.]
NINE FIFTY THREE.I'M GONNA CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER.
THIS IS THE CIVIL, EXCUSE ME, THE CIVIL SERVICE BOARD OF SPECIAL CALL MEETING.
UM, UH, ANNA, ARE THERE ANY PUBLIC SPEAKERS? NO, WE DON'T HAVE ANY SPEAKER.
ITEM NUMBER THREE ON THE, ON THE AGENDA IS APPROVAL OF MINUTES.
THE MINUTES WILL BE, UH, AT THE, AT THE AUGUST MEETING.
SO WE GET TO ITEM NUMBER FOUR, HEARING ITEMS CONDUCT A GRIEVANCE APPEAL HEARING OF MR. ABDUL RAHIM SA SOLE, IN WHICH HE CLAIMS THE CIVIL SERVICE DEPARTMENT VIOLATED THE CIVIL SERVICE RULE SEVEN CON CONDUCT OF EXAMINATION SECTION SIX BY ALLOWING AN INELIGIBLE MEMBER TO TAKE THE DALLAS FIRE RESCUE LIEUTENANT'S PROMOTIONAL EXAM, WRITTEN EXAMINATION.
UM, I, I, I ASSUME WE ARE READY TO GO AND I WILL TURN THIS OVER TO, UH, MR. MARTIN TO, UH, LET ME ASK YOU THIS.
DO BOTH SIDES WANT INTO OPENING STATEMENT OR JUST GO STRAIGHT TO THE PRESENTATION OF EVIDENCE? I, I'D LIKE TO DO AN OPENING, BRIEF OPENING.
UH, MR. YEAH, I WOULD LIKE, THIS IS GREG.
I WOULD LIKE TO DO A, JUST A BRIEF OPENING STATEMENT AS WELL.
UH, I THINK, I THINK HE STARTED TO TURN IT OVER TO ME.
SO I WAS THINKING, CAUSE THIS IS MR. SALAS APPEAL, MR. SNYDER, UH, IS, IS, UH, IS, UH, STARTING OFF, BUT THAT'S JUST MY IMPRESSION.
MAYBE IF MR. SNYDER DISAGREES.
WELL, LET ME, LET ME SAY, NORMALLY WE HAVE APPEALS ALL THE TIME WITH EMPLOYMENT MATTERS, UH, AND TERMINATIONS, AND WE HAVE THE CITY GO FIRST TO DO IS POSITION.
I I, YOU KNOW WHAT, UH, UH, JUST THIS IS GREG, JUST MY IMPRESSION IN TERMS OF MATTER OF BURDEN, IF, IF WE'RE DOING A TRIAL BOARD, IT'S PART OF THE CITY'S BURDEN TO PROVE THE REASONABLENESS OF THEIR, UH, OKAY.
BUT AS AN APPEAL, IT'S, IT'S THE APPELLANT'S BURDEN.
MR. NYER THEN, ARE YOU READY, PREPARED TO GO FORWARD? YES.
MR. SNYDER, CAN YOU DO WITHIN FIVE MINUTES, YOU THINK? ABSOLUTELY.
THANK YOU, UH, MEMBERS OF THE TRIAL BOARD.
I KNOW THIS IS, UH, WE'VE HAD THIS RESCHEDULED A COUPLE OF TIMES AND I APPRECIATE YOUR, YOUR COURTESY THERE.
UH, THE FACTS HERE ARE, I THINK, I THINK THERE'S NOT REALLY GONNA BE MANY DISPUTED FACTS OF THIS CASE.
UM, BUT THE FACTS ARE PRETTY STRAIGHTFORWARD.
HERE ON, UH, NOVEMBER 17TH, 2020, UH, GRIEVANT, UH, WHO IS A DRIVER ENGINEER, FIRE RESCUE PARTICIPATED IN A PROMOTIONAL EXAMINATION THAT WAS ADMINISTERED FOR THE RANK OF LIEUTENANT.
HE TOOK THE TEST AND, UH, HE WAS, UM, NOT PROMOTED OFF OF THE LIST.
HOWEVER, HE DID, UH, QUALIFY FOR PROMOTION.
HE WAS ON THE PROMOTIONAL LIST.
IT WAS ONLY IN LATER THAT HE DISCOVERED, UH, THAT ONE OF THE TOP 50 CANDIDATES WHO WERE PROMOTED, UH, WAS AN INDIVIDUAL BY THE NAME OF, UH, GRADY.
AND HE, HE LEARNED THAT MR. GRADY, UH, WHO WAS PROMOTED OF THE, THE TOP 50 CANDIDATES, UH, HAD BEEN ALLOWED TO TAKE THE TEST.
SO, DRIVER ENGINEER ALI WAS RANKED AT NUMBER 51 AFTER THE TEST.
HE LATER LEARNED THAT 50 INDIVIDUALS WERE PROMOTED.
ONE OF THE INDIVIDUALS OF THE 50 WHO WERE PROMOTED, MR. GRAY, HAD SET FOR THAT SAME TEST AND BEEN REMOVED FROM THE TEST.
UH, THE EXAMINATION, UM, HE LEFT, HE WAS REMOVED, LEFT THE PLACE OF EXAMINATION, AND THEN HE WAS ALLOWED BACK IN TO TAKE THE TEST, AND HE SCORED AMONG THE TOP 50 CANDIDATES, AND HE WAS PROMOTED.
NOW, IT'S OUR POSITION THAT ALLOWING MR. GRADY TO TAKE THIS EXAMINATION TO BE ADMITTED TO, UH, AN EXAMINATION, A MAKEUP EXAMINATION.
I BELIEVE, UH, WHEN THAT HAPPENED AND HE WAS ALLOWED TO MAKE THE LIST AND THAT THAT WAS A VIOLATION, AND HAD IT NOT BEEN FOR THAT VIOLATION OF CIVIL SERVICE
[00:05:01]
RULES, UH, THE GRIEVANCE WOULD'VE BEEN A, AMONG THE 50 WHO WERE PROMOTED.AND THE RULES THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT STATES, NO APPLICANT SHALL BE ADMITTED TO EXAMINATION AFTER ANY CANDIDATE HAS WITHDRAWN OR LEFT THE PLACE OF EXAMINATION.
SO, WHEN WE LOOK AT THE WORDS THERE, THE VERY PLAIN MEANING OF THE WORDS, WE KNOW THAT THE, THE BELIEVE THE FACTS SUPPORT THIS, THAT MR. GRADY LEFT THE PLACE OF EXAMINATION.
WE BELIEVE HE LEFT THE PLACE OF EXAMINATION BECAUSE HE WAS IN VIOLATION OF, OF THE RULES OF ADMINISTERING THE EXAMS. HE LEFT THE PLACE OF EXAMINATION.
WE BELIEVE THE FACTS ARE GONNA SHOW THAT AFTER HE LEFT THE PLACE OF EXAMINATION, HE WAS LATER ADMITTED TO ANOTHER EXAMINATION, WHICH HE TOOK, AND HE ENDED UP LEAVING ON THE LIST AMONG THE TOP 50.
SO WE THINK THAT THAT'S A CLEAR VIOLATION OF A CIVIL SERVICE RULE, BECAUSE HE WAS ALLOWED TO, UH, TAKE EXAMINATION, BELIEVE THAT DUE TO THAT HE WAS PROMOTED RATHER THAN, UH, THE AGREEMENT.
WE THINK THAT THE GRIEVANCE SHOULD BE PROMOTED, UH, TO LIEUTENANT BECAUSE OF THIS, UH, VIOLATION OF THE CIVIL SERVICE RULES.
UH, I'D LIKE TO REITERATE MR. SNYDER'S, UH, UH, COMMENT TO THANK YOU TO THE BOARD FOR, FOR ACCOMMODATING US AND FOR, FOR SHOWING UP TODAY FOR A SPECIAL SESSION.
I REALLY APPRECIATE YOUR, YOUR TIME AND COURTESY.
UH, IT WON'T, WON'T BE LABOR OF THE POINT, AS MR. SNYDER SAYS THERE.
THERE'S NOT TOO MANY, TOO MANY FACTUAL, UH, ISSUES HERE.
OUR POSITION IS THAT MR. DAVIS, UH, AS THE SECRETARY OF THE CIVIL SERVICE DEPARTMENT WHO ADMINISTERS THESE EXAMS, UH, MR. GRADY DID LEAVE THE, UH, DID LEAVE THE ADMINISTRATION OF THAT EXAM IN NOVEMBER OF 2020.
UH, BUT THERE WAS A MA THERE WAS A MAKEUP EXAM THAT WAS ALREADY SCHEDULED FOR PEOPLE WHO COULDN'T MAKE THE PREVIOUS EXAM.
FOR WHATEVER REASON, MR. GRADY, OR EXCUSE ME, MR. DAVIS, IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CIVIL SERVICE RULES, DETERMINED THAT MR. GRADY COULD GO TO THAT LATER EXAM.
SO HE DIDN'T RETURN TO THE SAME ADMINISTRATION OF THE EXAM.
HE JUST SHOWED UP FOR THE MAKEUP EXAM THAT WAS ALREADY SCHEDULED.
THIS IS NOT A VIOLATION OF THE RULE.
MR. DAVIS TOOK A LOOK AT THE RULE, LISTENED TO MR. SALAS GRIEVANCE, DETERMINED THAT EVERYTHING WAS ABOVE BOARD.
AND IN ANY EVENT, IF MR. SOLO WAS NOT, UH, PROMOTED ON ANY, UH, BECAUSE OF ANY POSITION ON ELIGIBILITY LIST, IT'S NOT BECAUSE OF A VIOLATION OF THE RULE.
MR. GRAVY WAS PROPERLY, MR. GRADY WAS PROPERLY ALLOWED TO SIT FOR A LATER ADMINISTRATION OF THAT EXAM.
THAT'S IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE RULES, BOTH THE LANGUAGE OF THE RULES AND CERTAINLY THE PURPOSE OF THE RULES, UH, WHICH IS TO MAKE SURE THAT THE MOST, UH, ELIGIBLE AND, UH, QUALIFIED INDIVIDUALS ARE, ARE PUT ON THAT ELIGIBILITY LIST AND, AND PROMOTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THAT.
SO I THINK THAT WHAT MR. DAVIS WILL BE TALKING TODAY, AND I THINK THAT HE'LL PRO BE ABLE TO, TO FLESH THAT OUT A LITTLE BIT MORE.
CAN MR. SNYDER, DO YOU WANNA CALL YOUR FIRST WITNESS? YEAH, I'LL CALL THE G.
AND LESLIE, IF WE COULD SWEAR HIM IN, PLEASE? YES, SIR.
MR. SOLE, CAN YOU SEE ME? WILL YOU RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND, PLEASE? YES, MA'AM, I CAN.
WILL YOU RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND, PLEASE? DO YOU SWEAR OR AFFIRM THAT THE TESTIMONY YOU GIVE WILL BE THE TRUTH, THE WHOLE TRUTH, AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH? YES, MA'AM.
MR. SHOULD I, SHOULD I JUST, I ADDRESS YOU AS A DRIVER ENGINEER.
IS THAT THE PROPER TITLE? UH, YES, SIR.
IS THAT YOUR RANK WITH THE DALLAS FIRE RESCUE? YES, SIR.
AND HOW LONG HAVE YOU BEEN WITH THE DALLAS FIRE RESCUE? UH, APPROXIMATELY 12 YEARS NOW.
AND YOU STARTED IN FIRE ACADEMY, IS THAT CORRECT? SAY IT ONE MORE TIME, SIR, YOU WERE BREAKING UP WHEN YOU STARTED WORKING FOR THE, UH, DALLAS FIRE RESCUE.
WHAT WAS, WAS YOUR RANK, UH, RECRUIT? CAN YOU EXPLAIN THAT A LITTLE BIT? TRAINING, FIRE, RESCUE OFFICER THROUGH, WHEN YOU GET HIRED, AND YOU WERE TRAINED BY THE, UH, AT THE CITY'S FIRE ACADEMY, IS THAT CORRECT? YES, SIR.
AND THEN AT SOME POINT, DID YOU PROMOTE ABOVE THE, UH, RANK OF FIREFIGHTER? YES, SIR.
AND YOU PROMOTED TO DRIVER ENGINEER? THAT'S CORRECT.
AND THEN DID YOU FIND OUT ABOUT AN OPPORTUNITY TO PROMOTE ONCE AGAIN TO THE RANK OF
[00:10:01]
LIEUTENANT? UH, UH, SOMETIME, UH, AROUND 2020? YES, SIR, I DID.AND WAS THAT, UH, TEST TO BE ADMINISTERED ON NOVEMBER THE 17TH, 2020? UH, INITIALLY, I BELIEVE IT WAS SOMETIME IN JANUARY OR FEBRUARY OF 2020.
UH, BUT DUE TO COVID, THEY POSTPONED UNTIL FURTHER NOTICE, UH, UNTIL, I BELIEVE IT WAS NOVEMBER SEVEN, EXCUSE ME, NOVEMBER 17TH, 2020.
AND SO DID YOU, UH, WHAT DID YOU HAVE TO DO IN ORDER TO PARTICIPATE IN THE PROMOTIONAL EXAM? UH, FILL OUT THE APPLICATION THROUGH NEO GOV, UH, AND SIGN UP FOR THE EXAM.
DO YOU HAVE TO DO CERTAIN THINGS TO PREPARE FOR THE EXAMINATION? YES, SIR.
UH, A LOT OF STUDYING MONTH AND MONTH OF STUDYING.
AND THEN DURING THE, UH, ARE YOU GIVEN ANY DIRECTION ABOUT THE CONDUCT OR WHAT'S EXPECTED DURING THE EXAMINATION? YES, SIR.
THAT WE ALL RECEIVED? UH, THANKS.
WHAT SORT OF INSTRUCTIONS OR, UH, CONDITIONS DID, WERE YOU, UH, WERE YOU, UH, WE WERE, WE WERE EMAILED, UH, UH, VIDEO, UH, I BELIEVE IT WAS ABOUT 15, 17 MINUTES, UH, THAT EXPLAINED THE PROCESS OF THE TEST, UH, YOUR CONDUCT DURING THE TEST, THINGS YOU WERE ALLOWED TO HAVE AND NOT HAVE DURING THE TEST, UH, THE TYPES OF QUESTIONS THAT THEY, THAT YOU WOULD EXPECT TO SEE, UH, AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE.
AND WERE THESE RULES, UH, UNDERSTANDABLE TO YOU? SAY IT ONE MORE TIME.
WERE THESE RULES AND CONDITIONS UNDERSTANDABLE TO YOU? UNDERSTANDABLE? YES, SIR.
UM, WERE ANY OF THOSE CONDITIONS, UH, ADVISING YOU? WHAT, WHAT, THAT YOU COULDN'T, UM, HAVE A CELL PHONE INSIDE THE EXAMINATION AREA? UH, YES, SIR.
IT WAS UNDER PROHIBITED ITEMS. SO ONE OF, UH, SO YOU WERE ADVISED BEFORE THE EXAMINATION THAT A CELL PHONE WAS PROHIBITED, UH, THE POSSESSION OF A CELL PHONE WAS PROHIBITED INSIDE THE EXAMINATION AREA, IS THAT RIGHT? YES, SIR.
I BELIEVE IT'S SPECIFICALLY STATED, UH, ANY ELECTRONIC DEVICES ARE PROHIBITED, INCLUDING PAGERS, CELL PHONES, SMART WATCHES.
WAS THAT A ONE DAY EXAM? UH, THE WRITTEN PORTION WAS ONE DAY? YES, SIR.
WELL, WHAT WAS THE OUTCOME AS OF YOUR TESTING? DID YOU, DID YOU PASS THE TEST? UH, YES, SIR, I DID.
AND THEN, UH, WERE YOU PLACED ON ANY SORT OF MOTION LIST? UH, YES SIR.
YOU WERE PLACED, UH, UH, YOU WERE PLACED, DID YOU SCORED AND PASS THE TEST? YOU'RE ELIGIBLE TO GO TO THE, UM, ORAL BOARD REVIEW, WHICH IS, I BELIEVE WAS A, WAS A THREE DAY PROCESS, WHICH WAS, WHICH TOOK PLACE, I BELIEVE, A MONTH LATER.
SO THEN YOU WENT TO THE ORAL BOARD AFTER THAT? UH, YES, SIR.
AND YOU COULDN'T GET TO THAT, THE, THE STEP IN THE TEST, THE ORAL REVIEW BOARD, UNLESS YOU PASS THE EXAM, IS THAT RIGHT? UH, YES, SIR.
UNLESS YOU MADE THE PASS POINT.
SO WHAT WAS THE FINAL OUTCOME OF THE PROMOTION OF THE TESTING PROCESS? DID YOU END UP ON A PROMOTION LIST? UH, YES, SIR.
I ENDED UP NUMBER 51 ON THE LIST.
AND THEN THE LIST, SO THE LIST EXPIRED WHILE BEFORE YOU GOT PROMOTED? YES, SIR.
THE LIST DID, DO YOU KNOW, DO YOU KNOW HOW MANY PEOPLE WERE PROMOTED OFF OF THAT LIST? 50 50? YES, SIR.
SO THEN WHEN THE LIST EXPIRED, YOU, YOU, YOU REALIZED THAT YOU MISSED BEING PROMOTED BY ONE, UH, ONE SPOT ON THE LIST, IS THAT RIGHT? THAT IS CORRECT.
AND THEN AT WHAT POINT DID YOU HEAR SOMETHING ABOUT MR. GRADY, UH, SITTING FOR THE TEST? UH, IT WAS THE FOLLOWING PROMOTIONAL EXAM.
I WAS WALKING BACK TO THE STATION, CAUSE I WORK AT STATION FOUR, UH, WITH SOME OF THE GUYS.
AND THEY WERE TALKING ABOUT HOW SOME GUY GOT, UH, REMOVED FROM THE TEST AND THEN WAS LATER ELIGIBLE TO TAKE THE TEST, WHICH THAT WAS THE FIRST TIME I HAD HEARD OF IT, UH, THAT HE WAS ABLE TO GO BACK AND TAKE THE TEST.
UH, DID YOU FILE A GRIEVANCE ONCE
[00:15:01]
YOU LEARNED THAT, UH, ONE OF THE, ONE OF, UH, CANDIDATES THAT WAS TESTING THE SAME TIME YOU WERE TESTING WAS ALLOWED TO TAKE THE TEST AFTER HE WAS REMOVED FROM THE EXAMINATION AREA? UH, I FILED THE GRIEVANCE ONCE I HAD KNOWLEDGE OF THAT EVENT, UH, ONCE I HAD KNOWLEDGE THAT THAT EVENT HAD TAKEN PLACE.SO WHAT DO YOU, SO WAS IT YOUR UNDERSTANDING THEN WHEN, WHEN YOU LEARNED ABOUT MR. GRADY, THAT, THAT IF HE HAD NOT BEEN ALLOWED TO TAKE THE TEST AFTER HE WAS REMOVED, WHICH IS YOUR UNDERSTANDING OR BELIEF THAT YOU WOULD'VE BEEN NUMBER 50 ON THE LIST? YES, SIR.
UM, SO YOU FILED THE GRIEVANCE, UM, AND DID YOU LOOK AT THE CIVIL SERVICE RULE WHEN YOU FILED THE GRIEVANCE? YES, SIR.
I WENT THROUGH THE CIVIL SERVICE, UH, LAWS AND CAME ACROSS THAT ONE THAT STATED, ONCE YOU ARE, UH, REMOVED OR WITHDRAW FROM THE TEST, YOU'RE NO LONGER ELIGIBLE TO TAKE THAT TEST.
AND THEN WAS IT EXPLAINED TO YOU, WAS IT EXPLAINED TO YOU THAT WHEN MR. GRADY WAS REMOVED FROM THE TEST, THE SAME DAY YOU TOOK IT, THAT HE LATER TOOK MAKEUP EXAM? HE DIDN'T TAKE THE SAME TEST AS YOU? YES, SIR.
HE DID TAKE THE SAME TEST HE TAKE.
HE HE DID NOT TAKE THE SAME TEST AS YOU, RIGHT? NOT THAT DAY, NO, SIR.
HE TOOK A, WHAT'S BEEN DESCRIBED AS A MAKEUP TEST, CORRECT? YES, SIR.
AND TO MY KNOWLEDGE, IT, IT WAS THE SAME, SAME TEST, BUT JUST A DIFFERENT DAY.
AND THAT'S WHAT, UM, IT WAS MR. UH, DAVIS, UM, THAT'S WHAT HE TOLD YOU IN A LETTER TO YOU ABOUT YOUR GRIEVANCE FROM MR. JARED DAVIS, THE SECRETARY OF THE CIVIL SERVICE BOARD? YES, SIR.
BUT YOU UNDERSTAND THAT THE, THE CIVIL SERVICE RULE THAT YOU, THAT YOU CITED IN YOUR GRIEVANCE, IT SAYS, NO APPLICANT SHALL BE ADMITTED TO ANY EXAMINATION, CORRECT? YES, SIR.
WHAT, SO WHAT ARE YOU ASKING? UH, SO YOUR, YOUR POSITION IS CORRECT ME IF I'M THAT, THAT YOU WERE NOT PROMOTED BECAUSE THERE WAS A VIOLATION OF THE CIVIL SERVICE RULES IN ALLOWING MR. GRADY TO TAKE THE MAKEUP TEST.
AND THAT BECAUSE HE WAS, BECAUSE THE RULES VIOLATED, YOU EFFECTIVELY WERE NOT ALLOWED TO PROMOTE BECAUSE YOU WOULD'VE BEEN NUMBER 50, BUT FOR THAT VIOLATION, IS THAT RIGHT? YES, SIR.
SO, AND YOU'RE ASKING THE BOARD TO FIND THAT THERE WAS A VIOLATION OF THE CIVIL SERVICE RULES, AND YOU'RE ASKING THEM TO RETROACTIVELY PROMOTE YOU TO THE RANK OF LIEUTENANT, UH, TO THE, TO THE DATE WHERE YOU WOULD'VE BEEN PROMOTED, HAD THIS VIOLATION OF THE CIVIL SERVICE RULES NOT OCCURRED.
IS THAT RIGHT? THAT'S CORRECT, SIR.
GOOD MORNING, THIS IS GREG MARTIN.
I'M SORRY, IS IT SALI? SALA? I, I DON'T SALI SALA.
UH, JUST A, JUST A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS.
UH, YOU WERE DISCUSSING THE NOVEMBER, UH, 2020 LIEUTENANT PROMOTIONAL EXAM, CORRECT? YES, SIR.
AND YOU PASS THE EXAM, YOU PASS THE ORALS, AND SO YOU GET PUT ON A PROMOTIONAL LIST? CORRECT.
AND, AND I BELIEVE MR. SNYDER ASKED YOU ABOUT THE LIST EXPIRING.
SO, SO JUST TO CLARIFY, WHEN YOU'RE ON THAT LIST, THAT LIST IS ONLY, UH, LET'S SAY, UH, ACTIVE OR IN PLAY FOR A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF TIME, IS THAT RIGHT? YES, SIR.
AND SO SINCE THEN, HAVE YOU SAT FOR, UH, AN ADDITIONAL, UH, LIEUTENANT PROMOTIONAL EXAM? YES, SIR.
NOT TRYING TO BE LEADING, I THINK IT WAS SOMEWHERE AROUND 2022, IS THAT RIGHT? DO YOU RECALL EXACTLY? UH, YES, SIR.
UH, I BELIEVE IT WAS AROUND THE 20TH OF SEPTEMBER, BUT OKAY.
I BELIEVE SOMEWHERE AROUND THERE.
AND THE LIST, THE LIST THAT I WAS ON WAS STILL ACTIVE WHEN THEY GAVE THAT TEST.
UH, SO FOR THAT 2022 EXAM, UH, DID YOU PASS THE WRITTEN PORTION AS WELL? YES, SIR.
AND DID YOU GO TO THE, THE ORAL BOARDS? YES, SIR.
AND ARE YOU CURRENTLY ON A PROMOTIONAL LIST? UH, YES, SIR.
AND SO THAT, THAT LIST IS ACTIVE AS OF NOW? MM-HMM.
AND CAN YOU, WHEN YOU SAY THE LIST, YOU
[00:20:01]
SORT OF, YOUR PLACEMENT ON THE LIST, LIKE, IS THAT JUST PUBLICLY, NOT PUBLICLY? IS IT AVAILABLE TO EVERYBODY IN THE DEPARTMENT? CAN YOU JUST GO AND PULL IT UP AND SEE THE LIST? I BELIEVE, I BELIEVE IT'S, UH, KNOWLEDGE FOR THE PUBLIC.UH, THEY POST IN THE CIVIL SERVICE, SO I THINK ANYBODY'S ABLE TO GO AND VIEW IT TO MY, TO MY UNDERSTANDING.
I'M SORRY, I DIDN'T MEAN TO CUT YOU OFF, SIR.
AND IN TERMS OF THE, THE PROMOTIONS, LIKE, IS THAT, CAN YOU TELL THAT FROM THE LIST AS WELL, IN TERMS OF HOW MANY OF THESE PEOPLE HAVE BEEN PROMOTED? LIKE, HOW DOES THAT SORT OF, WHAT DOES THAT LOOK LIKE? UH, I I'M SORRY, I'M NOT UNDERSTANDING WHAT YOU'RE ASKING.
WELL, I, I, I GUESS IT'S THE IDEA OF, YOU KNOW, SAYING THE IDEA OF LIKE, YOU KNOW, THESE, THIS MANY PEOPLE WERE PROMOTED AND I WAS IN THIS POSITION.
IS THAT SORT OF EVIDENT FROM THE LIST OR IS THAT JUST A MATTER OF MORE FIGURING OUT HOW MANY PEOPLE BEEN PRO? HOW DID YOU KNOW HOW MANY PEOPLE YOU KIND, YOU KIND OF, UH, FIGURE IT OUT AND YOU KEEP TRACK OF IT? OKAY.
UH, WITH THROUGH PROMOTIONS AND WHEN WE HAD THE IDS, OUR IDS IS DOWN, YOU COULD SEE IT WHEN PEOPLE WERE PROMOTED THROUGH A TRANSFER LIST, AND THEN YOU'D FIGURE OUT WHERE YOU ARE.
SO RIGHT NOW, AND, AND, AND I WON'T GET INTO WHERE YOU ARE ON THE, THE ACTIVE LIST, BUT YOU HAVE AN IDEA OF LIKE, HOW MANY PEOPLE ARE BETWEEN, YOU KNOW, HOW MANY PEOPLE ARE BETWEEN YOU AND, AND THE NUMBER OF PROMOTIONS THAT ARE, THAT ARE COMING UP.
WELL, THE, LEMME REPHRASE THAT.
YOU HAVE AN IDEA HOW MANY PEOPLE ARE, ARE, ARE HIGHER AND LOWER THAN YOU ON THE LIST, RIGHT? YES, SIR.
AND YOU HAVE, AND YOU HAVE AN IDEA OF HOW MANY PROMOTIONS HAVE OCCURRED FOR THAT ELIGIBILITY PERIOD, CORRECT? UH, THERE IS A WAY TO FIND OUT, BUT I'M NOT SURE, BECAUSE LIKE I SAID, WE DON'T HAVE AN IDS, WE DON'T KNOW PROMOTIONS AND ALL THIS, SO IT'S HARD TO TRACK FOR US.
NOW, I JUST WANTED A LITTLE BIT OF BACKGROUND JUST IN TERMS OF HOW, HOW THAT'S TRACKED.
BUT, BUT, BUT THAT'S, THAT'S, THAT'S WHAT I HAVE FOR THIS WITNESS.
I'LL, I'LL, I'LL PASS IT BACK.
EITHER FURTHER QUESTION, MR. ALI, OR DO YOU HAVE ANOTHER WITNESS? NO, NO MORE WITNESSES.
UH, SO MR. MARTIN, THIS IS YOUR TIME.
IF YOU HAVE ANY WITNESSES? YES, I'D LIKE TO CALL MR. JARED DAVIS.
DO YOU SWEAR OR AFFIRM THAT THE TESTIMONY YOU GIVE WILL BE THE TRUTH, THE WHOLE TRUTH, AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH? I DO.
I, I'M PRETTY CONFIDENT THAT, UH, EVERYBODY ON THIS CALL KNOWS WHO YOU ARE, BUT JUST FOR THE RECORD, COULD YOU, UH, TELL US YOUR, YOUR CURRENT POSITION AND YOUR RESPONSIBILITIES IN THAT ROLE? THANK YOU.
MY NAME IS JARED DAVIS, AND I HAVE THE PLEASURE AND PRIVILEGE OF SERVING AS THE CITY OF DALLAS CIVIL SERVICE BOARD SECRETARY AND DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR.
HOW LONG HAVE YOU BEEN IN THAT ROLE? I'VE BEEN IN THIS ROLE A LITTLE OVER FOUR AND A HALF YEARS, I THINK, AT THIS POINT.
AND CAN YOU GENERALLY DESCRIBE YOUR RESPONSIBILITIES IN THAT ROLE? YEAH, I'M RESPONSIBLE FOR OVERSEEING THE, THE DISCHARGE DUTIES FROM THE CIVIL SERVICE BOARD TO ADMINISTER, UM, EMPLOYMENT SCREENING, RECRUITMENT SOURCING, AND SCREENING FOR OUR CIVIL SERVICE POSITIONS HERE AT THE CITY OF DALLAS, INCLUDING IN OUR SWORN SERVICE, INCLUDING PROMOTIONAL ACTIVITY FOR BOTH POLICE AND FIRE, UM, AND OVERSEEING THE GRIEVANCE, UM, AND HEARING AND APPEAL PROCESS TO THE, TO THE TRIAL BOARD AND TO THE ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE.
SO AS PART OF YOUR RESPONSIBILITIES, YOU ARE INVOLVED IN, IN DECIDING GRIEVANCES REGARDING THE CIVIL SERVICE RULES? CORRECT.
AND PART OF YOUR JOB, RESPON RESPONSIBILITIES ARE INTERPRETING AND ENFORCING THESE CIVIL SERVICE RULES, CORRECT? CORRECT.
CAN YOU TELL US A LITTLE BIT, JUST GENERALLY, NOT SPECIFIC TO THIS ONE, BUT JUST HOW DO YOU GO ABOUT ISSUING A DECISION REGARDING A GRIEVANCE OR LOOKING INTO A GRIEVANCE? SO CAN YOU TELL US A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THAT PROCESS? YEAH, I THINK JUST AS A MATTER OF CONTEXT, IT'S VERY RARE THAT I THINK THE CIVIL SERVICE DEPARTMENT, UM, IS CONFRONTED WITH A GRIEVANCE, UM, HEARING OR A GRIEVANCE SUCH AS WE HAVE TODAY.
BUT ORDINARILY THEY COME AROUND THE TESTING ENVIRONMENT OR, OR WHATEVER THE CASE MAY BE.
AND SO WHEN I'M PUT ON NOTICE THAT, YOU KNOW, THERE IS AN AGGRIEVED, UM, UM, EMPLOYEE OF SORTS, SO, UH, WITH, WITH AN ISSUE OR SERVICE THAT THE DEPARTMENT HAS HANDLED, TRY TO UNDERSTAND THE FACTS SURROUNDING THAT GRIEVANCE.
UM, UNDERSTANDING WHAT RULE IMPLICATIONS ARE AT PLAY, UM, ON THE BASIS OF THE GRIEVANCE.
AND THEN ANALYZING THE FACTS TO DETERMINE, YOU KNOW, WHETHER OR NOT, UM, SOME, YOU KNOW, SOMETHING INAPPROPRIATE HAS HAPPENED IN LIGHT OF A, HOW THE RULES ARE WRITTEN AND HOW THEY'VE ORDINARILY BEEN INTERPRETED AND ENFORCED, UM, UM, HISTORICALLY, UM, FROM AN OPERATIONAL PERSPECTIVE.
UH, CAN I, UH, I'D LIKE TO INTRODUCE, UM, UH, IT'S CITY'S EXHIBIT NUMBER SIX, BUT IT'S THE CIVIL SERVICE RULES, UH, OBJECT.
UH, THE CORRECT TITLE IS CODE AND RULES.
CODE OF RULES AND REGULATIONS OF THE CIVIL SERVICE POINT.
UH, WE HAVE NO, NO, NO, NO OBJECTION TO THAT.
[00:25:01]
RULES.ANYWAY, SO
I'M GONNA DIRECT YOU TO PAGE, IT'S OF THE CITY'S DOCUMENT.
IT'S, IT'S, UH, SORRY, I HAD IT HERE.
THAT'S WHY, UM, WE'RE LOOKING AT, UH, PAGE, YEAH, WE'RE LOOKING AT PAGE SIX, I THINK OF MY PDF AT LEAST, BUT IT'S RULE A CONDUCT OF EXAMINATIONS, I BELIEVE.
UH, GRIEVANCE ALSO, UH, UPLOADED THIS PORTION.
YEAH, THE GREG, THE DOCUMENTS THAT I GOT THAT YOU HAD SENT ME, THEY HAVE A SORT OF A BAIT STAMP.
NO, NO, NO, YOU'RE RIGHT, YOU'RE RIGHT.
AND I BELIEVE THAT STAMP IS PAGE 23.
YEAH, I, I APOLOGIZE FOR THAT.
SO YOU HAVE A, YOU SEE THAT DOCUMENT? YES, SIR.
AND SO, YOU KNOW, I UNDERSTAND WE'RE ON THE RECORD, BUT I KNOW EVERYBODY KIND OF KNOWS ALL THIS, SO, WE'LL, I'LL, I'LL DO, UH, BE A LITTLE BIT LEANING HERE, BUT CIVIL, CIVIL SERVICE, UH, ADMINISTERS, UH, THESE EXAMINATIONS, CORRECT? CORRECT.
AND A REPRESENTATIVE OF THE CIVIL SERVICE DEPARTMENT IS PRESENT AT THE SITE OF THE EXAMINATIONS? CORRECT.
AND THESE RULES, ALTHOUGH NOT ON THIS PARTICULAR PAGE, BUT THE CIVIL SERVICE RULES DESCRIBE THE REQUIREMENTS FOR PROPO PROMOTIONAL EXAMS WITHIN THE CITY, IS THAT RIGHT? THAT IS RIGHT.
AND THAT INCLUDES THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS TO BE ABLE TO SIT FOR PROMOTIONAL EXAMS, CORRECT? CORRECT.
AND THAT INCLUDES DALLAS FIRE RESCUE, THAT INCLUDES OUR FIRE RESCUE.
AND PROMOTIONS IN DALLAS FIRE RESCUE ARE MADE IN ACCORDANCE TO THESE RULES, RIGHT? CORRECT.
CIVIL SERVICE CREATES AN ELIGIBLE LIST CREATED AS A RESULT OF PROMOTIONAL EXAMINATIONS, CORRECT? YES, SIR.
AND SECTION TWO ON THIS PAGE THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT STATES, UH, THAT ALL EXAMINATIONS SHALL BE IMPARTIAL, FAIR AND PRACTICAL, AND DESIGNED TO TEST THE RELATIVE QUALIFICATIONS OF FITNESS OF APPLICANTS TO DISCHARGE THE DUTIES OF THE PARTICULAR POSITIONS FOR WHICH THEY SEEK THE FILL.
WOULD YOU SAY THAT THAT'S, THAT'S SORT OF THE MISSION STATEMENT OR THE PURPOSE FOR THESE RULES IN TERMS OF PROMOTIONAL EXAMINATIONS? YES.
I WOULD SAY THAT'S THE, THAT'S THE PURPOSE OF THESE RULES.
I WOULD ALSO SAY THAT THAT'S THE CHIEF PRIMARY FUNCTION, UM, OF THIS OFFICE AS WELL, TO CREATE A TESTING ENVIRONMENT WHEREBY THESE THINGS MAY OCCUR.
AND CAN I DIRECT YOU TO SECTION SIX AS WELL? UH, I'LL, I'LL, I'LL PROFFER THAT THIS IS SORT OF THE SECTION THAT'S AT ISSUE HERE.
SO NO APPLICANT SHALL BE ADMITTED TO ANY EXAMINATION AFTER ANY CANDIDATE HAS WITHDRAWN OR LEFT A PLACE OF EXAMINATION.
CAN I ASK YOU A QUESTION ABOUT THAT LATER, BUT JUST SO WE'RE NOT SWITCHING BACK AND FORTH A BUNCH, I JUST WANTED TO POINT THAT OUT.
SO, UH, SO ARE YOU FAMILIAR WITH THE GRIEVANCE ISSUES HERE SPECIFIC TO MR. STALIN? CORRECT? I I AM.
AND THIS INVOLVES THE ADMINISTRATION OF THE LIEUTENANT PROMOTIONAL EXAM FOR DALLAS FIRE RESCUE, RIGHT? IT DOES.
SO LET'S GO TO PAGE ONE OF THE CITY'S EXHIBITS.
JUST REAL BRIEFLY, THIS WAS PROVIDED TO YOU RE REQUESTING A GRIEVANCE HEARING, CORRECT? CORRECT.
IN REFERENCE TO THE NOVEMBER 17TH, 2020 LIEUTENANT PROMOTIONAL EXAM, CORRECT? RIGHT.
SO YOU SEE HERE IN THIS STATEMENT IT SAYS THAT, UH, UH, ON THE DATE OF THE WRITTEN EXAM, KYLE GRADY WAS KICKED OUT OF THE EXAM.
IS THAT ACCURATE THAT MR. GRADY WAS KICKED OUT OF THE EXAM? I DON'T KNOW THAT I WOULD COLOR, UM, MR. GRADY'S, UM, DISMISSAL OR LEAVING DEPARTURE FROM THE EXAM AS A QUOTE UNQUOTE, YOU KNOW, KICKED OUT.
UM, BUT WELL, LEMME JUST ASK YOU WHAT HAPPENED, YOU KNOW, IN YOUR WORDS, SORT OF WHAT HAPPENED? SURE.
SO, UM, AS MR. SOLA REFERENCED IN HIS TESTIMONY, UM, WE HAD TO ORIGINALLY POSTPONE THE ORIGINAL ADMINISTRATION OF THIS EXAMINATION DUE TO THE COVID 19 OUTBREAK.
AND SO THIS WAS ONE OF THE FIRST EXAMS THAT WE BROUGHT BACK ONLINE, UM, TO CONTINUE WITH PROMOTION, NO ACTIVITIES, UM, IN THAT NOVEMBER.
SO I, I RE I RECALL THIS, THIS EXAMINATION DISTINCTLY.
UM, AND SO WE WERE VERY, VERY SENSITIVE TO MAKING SURE THAT WE WERE MAINTAINING, UM, UM, YOU KNOW, THE APPROPRIATE SPACING AND THE REPORTING AND THE QUARANTINE AND ALL OF THOSE RELATIVE ITEMS. AND ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I WAS MADE AWARE OF FROM THE TEAM WAS THAT AN INDIVIDUAL CAME INTO THE EXAMINATION ROOM AT THE DALLAS CONVENTION CENTER ON THE 17TH OF NOVEMBER.
AND BEFORE THE, THE EXAM BEGAN, UM, MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT MR. GRADY GOT THE ATTENTION OF ONE OF OUR STAFF MEMBERS, UM, AND DISCLOSED THAT HE MISTAKENLY HAD
[00:30:01]
BROUGHT HIS CELL PHONE FROM HIS VEHICLE BACK IN, IN, IN, INTO THE, INTO THE EXAMINATION PLACE, UM, BECAUSE HE HAD DONE SO.UM, HE WANTED TO KNOW IF HE COULD TAKE HIS PHONE TO THE CAR AND RETURN BACK TO THE EXAMINATION PLACE.
UM, AND IT WAS EXPLAINED TO HIM THAT, UM, BECAUSE HE HAD, HE WAS DISMISSED FROM THE EXAM, THIS WAS HAVING THE POSSESSION OF THE CELL PHONE.
AND, AND TO BE CLEAR ON THE TIMELINE HERE, THIS IS AFTER THE START DATE OF THE EXAM HAD PASSED, BUT IT'S BEFORE THE ACTUAL ADMINISTRATIVE ADMINISTRATION OF THE EXAM HAD BE CORRECT? YEAH.
SO THE TESTING MATERIAL HAD NOT BEEN DISSEMINATED, OPENED OR, OR ANY OF THE OTHER THINGS.
AS I THINK ABOUT TEST SECURITY CONSIDERATIONS, NONE OF THAT HAD OCCURRED.
THIS, HE, HE DISCLOSED TO STAFF BEFORE THE BEGINNING OF THE EXAM, YOU KNOW, IN EFFECT, WHAT I UNDERSTAND, OOPS, I ACCIDENTALLY HAVE THE CELL PHONE, WHAT CAN I DO? AND THAT'S HOW MR. GRADY BECAME EXCUSED FROM THE PLACE OF EXAMINATION BEFORE THE EXAM BEGAN.
AND, AND FOR THAT ADMINISTRATION OF THE EXAM, RIGHT? CORRECT.
UH, AND, AND BECAUSE THE EXAM, THE, THE START TIME OF THE EXAM HAD ALREADY PASSED, IT WAS TOO LATE FOR HIM TO COME BACK IN BECAUSE EVEN THOUGH THE, THE EXAM BOOKS HAD NOT BEEN OPEN, LIKE IT HASN'T STARTED YET, IT WAS AFTER THE START TIME.
AND SO HE, HE, HE, HE WAS NOT ALLOWED TO COME BACK IN, IS THAT CORRECT? CORRECT.
CAN I EX I'M GONNA POINT YOU TO EXHIBIT FOUR, THE CITY'S EXHIBITS.
THIS IS PAGE STARTING ON PAGE NINE.
UH, DO YOU RECOGNIZE THIS? AND CAN YOU TELL US WHAT IT IS? YES.
THIS IS A PROMOTIONAL, WHAT WE CALL A PROMOTIONAL ANNOUNCEMENT.
SO ANYTIME THAT THE CHIEF OF THE DEPARTMENT REQUESTS PROMOTIONS AS THEY HAVE THE AUTHORITY AND THE RESPONSIBILITY TO REQUEST PROMOTIONS OBJECT, CAN I, UH, OBJECT TO THIS? I MEAN, THIS IS THE ELEPHANT IN THE ROOM.
OBVIOUSLY, THIS ISN'T, THIS, THE, THE DOCUMENTS THAT WERE WITHDRAWN ON THE LAST HEARING, MR. WELCH, THIS, THIS IS GREG.
JUST IF I COULD RESPOND TO THAT OBJECTION.
I, I WOULD JUST SAY THAT THE, THE CITY WAS WILLING TO WITHDRAW THOSE, HEARING THOSE, THOSE, UH, EXHIBITS FOR THE LAST HEARING FOR PURPOSES OF MOVING FORWARD WITH THE LAST HEARING.
BUT BECAUSE THE HEARING WAS POSTPONED AND FOR, JUST FOR THE VERY REASON THAT THE EXHIBITS COULD BE REVIEWED, UH, I, I WOULD, I WOULD OPPOSE, I I WOULD SAY THAT THE CITY DID NOT WITHDRAW THEM FOR PURPOSES OF, OF, OF, OF THIS HEARING DATE AND TIME.
I WOULD, THE CITY OFFERED TO DO THAT FOR PURPOSES MOVING FORWARD LAST TIME.
SO LET ME ASK, THIS IS, UH, THE DOCUMENT BEGAN ON PAGE NINE, IS THE NOTICE OF THE FIRE LIEUTENANT EXAMINATION IN SEPTEMBER OF 22, CORRECT? NO, I THINK IT'S, CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, GREG, I THINK THIS IS EXHIBIT FOUR.
YOU'RE, YOU'RE, NO, Y YOU, I'M, I'M ACTUALLY WRONG, MR. WELCH.
I, I ACCIDENTALLY POINTED TO PAGE NINE AND, AND, UH, MR. SNYDER'S, RIGHT? OKAY.
I INTENDED TO, I INTENDED TO POINT TO THE PREVIOUS ONE.
SO, UH, OH, WAIT, WHAT PAGE, WHAT PAGE ON YOUR DOCUMENT ARE YOU LOOKING AT? PAGE FOUR.
BUT I THINK MR. SNYDER'S OBJECTION IS APPLICABLE TO BOTH OF THOSE DOCUMENTS.
THE DOCUMENT THAT I HAVE THAT YOU PROVIDED, MR. MARTIN, TELL ME IF I'M WRONG, I'M LOOKING AT PAGE FOUR, IS THE FAR LIEUTENANT EXAM NOTICE, AND THAT IS FOR THE EXAM IN NOVEMBER SEVEN, ON NOVEMBER 17TH, 2020.
AND THIS IS THE EXAM THAT WAS AN ISSUE THAT WHERE, WHERE THIS ALLEGEDLY HAPPENED WITH MR. GRADY, CORRECT? I, I WOULD SAY, I WOULD SAY SO.
I DON'T THINK MR. SNYDER WOULD DISAGREE.
AND MR. SCHNEIDER, YOU'RE OBJECTING TO THIS DOCUMENT OR ARE YOU OBJECTING TO THE 2022 DOCUMENT? I'M OBJECTING TO BOTH OF THEM PREVIOUSLY.
I MEAN, WE HAD A LONG DISCUSSION ABOUT THIS AT THE LAST HEARING, AND THE REASON WAS THAT IT, IT WASN'T, UH, HE MISSED A DEADLINE.
HE DIDN'T, HE DIDN'T PROVIDE THESE.
SO WE TALKED A LOT ABOUT THAT THE LAST TIME.
UM, I, I JUST, I'M MAKING MY, THE SAME OBJECTION I MADE BEFORE.
UM, AND I, I, I CAN'T PRETEND LIKE, LIKE THE LAST TIME DIDN'T HAPPEN.
SO YOUR, YOUR OBJECTION ISN'T ON THE MERITS OF THE DOCUMENT.
IT'S ON THE ISN'T ON, ON THE, ON THE DELIVERY OF THE EXHIBIT TO YOU? MY OBJECTION ON EXHIBIT ON BOTH OF THEM OR THAT THEY WEREN'T PROVIDED WITHIN THE DEADLINE.
AND THEN MY OBJECTION, UH, IN ADDITION AND MORE SPECIFICALLY
[00:35:01]
FOR, UM, EXHIBIT FIVE, THIS IS NOT RELEVANT.LET ME, WHICH, WHICH IS PAGE, WHAT EXHIBIT FIVE BEGINS ON, WHAT IS THAT? THE, OH, THAT'S THE ONE THAT BEGINS ON PAGE NINE, THE BATES STAMPS DOC? I BELIEVE SO.
MAKE SURE I GOT THE RIGHT DOCUMENTS.
NOW, MR. MARTIN, WE'VE CLARIFIED WHICH DOCUMENTS THAT WE HAVE.
LET ME KNOW YOUR, WHAT IS YOUR RESPONSE TO, UH, EXHIBITS THE, THE, THE PROMOTION FOR PROMOTIONAL EXAMINATION DOCUMENTS FOR NOVEMBER OF 2020 AND THEN FOR 2022? WELL, I, AS TO RELEVANCE, I, I THINK THAT THEY'RE RELEVANT BECAUSE THESE ARE NOTICE OF EXAMINATION.
THEY'RE PROVIDED BY CIVIL SERVICE, UH, WITH REGARDS TO THESE PROMOTIONAL EXAMINATIONS.
AND THE ISSUE HERE IS A GRIEVANCE ABOUT CIVIL SERVICES, UH, ADMINISTRATION OF THESE EXAMS AND WHETHER OR NOT THEY'RE FOLLOWING THE, THE EXAMINATION RULES, UH, IN, IN, IN, UH, IN ADMINISTERING THESE EXAMS. UH, SO I CERTAINLY THINK THAT THEY'RE RELEVANT WITH, WITH REGARDS TO THE OTHER ARGUMENT, THE, THE, THE PROCEDURAL ARGUMENT.
I THINK THE BOARD REMEMBERS THAT DISCUSSION AND REMEMBERS THAT THIS WAS RESCHEDULED TO A LATER DATE FOR THE EXACT REASON TO AVOID ANY PREJUDICE FOR DOCUMENTS, UH, THAT THE APPELLANT OR GRIEVANCE HAS NOT HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO REVIEW THE DOCUMENTS PRIOR TO THE HEARING.
AND THAT WAS THE BASIS OF THE NEW DATE.
AND SO THE IDEA THAT NOW BECAUSE, UH, THAT, THAT THEY STILL DIDN'T HAVE, I BELIEVE THAT THAT ARGUMENT IS NO LONGER VALID BECAUSE CERTAINLY THIS HAS BEEN RESCHEDULED AND THEY'VE HAD TIME TO REVIEW THESE.
AND SO, UH, I DON'T SEE A BASIS FOR FOR WITHHOLDING THEM JUST ON PURELY PROCEDURAL GROUNDS EITHER.
WELL, LET, LET ME ASK, LET ME ASK THIS QUESTION.
I MEAN, WE, AS A BOARD, THE APPEAL IS, UH, IS, IS GONNA REVOLVE AROUND, AT LEAST I BELIEVE, BUT IT'S GONNA REVOLVE AROUND HOW WE AS A BOARD INTERPRET RULE EIGHT, SECTION SIX, AS I UNDERSTAND IT.
SO, SO I MEAN, I THINK I KNOW WHERE YOU'RE, YOU'RE GOING WITH THE, THE WORDING OF THE, THAT WAS CONTAINED IN, IN THE 2022 NOTICE VERSUS THE 2020 NOTICE.
I, I'M OF THE OPINION THAT THE, THE DECISION WE MAKE TODAY, I, I DON'T REALLY MUCH CARE WHAT WAS IN THE, THE, WHAT OCCURRED IS IN 2020.
AND, AND WE HAVE TO, WE HAVE TO MAKE A DECISION WHETHER THE ISSUES INVOLVING MR. GRADY, WHAT, WHAT THAT MEANS WITH REGARD TO RULE EIGHT, SECTION SIX.
SO I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT HOW A 2022 ANNOUNCEMENT OF AN EXAM HAS ANYTHING TO DO WITH, WITH HOW WE INTERPRET WHAT HAPPENED IN NOVEMBER OF 2020 INVOLVING MR. GRADY AND, AND THE RESULTING ISSUES WITH MR. SALI AND I, AND I'LL OPEN UP THIS BOARD FOR YOUR INTERPRETATION.
SO I'M SOMEWHAT INCLINED TO SAY, I, I THINK THAT WE, WE ALL AGREE THE TEST WAS ON THE NOVEMBER, IN NOVEMBER OF 2020, WHATEVER, WHETHER A DATE THAT WAS, WE HAVE NO, UH, UH, WE HAVE NO ISSUE WITH THAT.
AND, AND I'M JUST TRYING TO FIGURE OUT HOW CHANGING WORDING ON AN AN ANNOUNCEMENT HAS ANY EFFECT ON MR. SALI AND WHAT OCCURRED IN 2020.
AND I, AND I'LL GIVE YOU AN OPPORTUNITY TO RESPOND TO THAT.
CAUSE I, I'M, I'M JUST STILL A LITTLE BAFFLED BY THAT.
CAUSE IT LOOKS LIKE OUR, OUR, TO ME, OUR SCOPE IS LIMITED TO RULE EIGHT, SECTION SIX, HOW WE INTERPRET THAT AS, AS THE FACTS PRESENTED TO US.
IF I, IF ANY BOARD MEMBERS DISAGREE WITH ME, PLEASE LET ME KNOW.
THIS, THIS, THIS IS A WHOLE BOARD ACTING AS A, AN APPEAL BODY HERE.
AND THIS, THIS IS GREG MARTIN.
JUST TO CLARIFY, MR. WELCH, UH, THE PURPOSE FOR THIS, FOR THE 2022 NOTICE, I BELIEVE IT'S HELPFUL TO, UH, THE ARGUMENTS THAT WE'RE MAKING THAT MR. DAVIS'S DECISION IN INTERPRETING THAT SECTION, SECTION SIX IS CONSISTENT, UH, WITH THE, WITH BOTH THE WORDING AND THE SPIRIT OF THE CIVIL SERVICE RULES.
WELL, I, UNLESS THE BOARD DISAGREES WITH ME THAT THIS IS THEIR OPPORTUNITY TO SAY, SO I, I'M INCLINED TO, I I HAVE NO PROBLEM ADMITTING THE TEST.
THE, THE EXAMINATION NOTICE FROM 2020 NOVEMBER, 2020, THAT SEEMS PERFECTLY LOGICAL TO ME.
THIS IS WHAT EVERYBODY WAS OPERATING UNDER.
AND, UH, I'M INCLINED TO ADMIT THAT DOCUMENT AND THEN THE DOCUMENT ABOUT THE PROMOTIONAL EXAMINATION ANNOUNCEMENT FOR 2020 TO NOT ADMIT THAT DOCUMENT.
SO UNLESS THE BOARD HAS, UH, MEMBERS OF THE BOARD HAVE OBJECTION TO THAT, THAT THAT WOULD BE MY RULING.
I AGREE WITH, I WILL AGREE WITH YOU MR. CHAIR.
I, OKAY, I'M JUST TRYING TO, UM, I THOUGHT THAT THE REASON WE RESCHEDULED THIS AGAIN, BACK TO
[00:40:01]
MR. MARTIN'S POINT WAS THAT, SO WE COULD ALL SEE ALL THE DOCUMENTS AND THEN THEY WOULD BE ADMITTED.I WOULD LIKE THAT, YOU KNOW, THAT WAS MY UNDERSTANDING.
SO I'M JUST CONFU, I'M A LITTLE CONFUSED ABOUT THAT.
I THOUGHT THAT'S WHY WE RESCHEDULED THIS SO WE'D ALL HAVE THE CHANCE TO LOOK AT IT.
DIDN'T KNOW IT WAS GOING TO, IT WAS GOING BACK TO A PREVIOUS ISSUE.
I MIS MISUNDERSTOOD IN OUR MEETING, UM, THAT THAT WOULD BE, UH, POSITION OF MR. SCHNEIDER.
SO, AND I MAY NOT HAVE WANTED TO RESCHEDULE IF IT WASN'T GOING TO BE ADMITTABLE THAT WE HAVE THESE DOCUMENTS TO INCLUDE.
THAT'S, AND I'M, THAT'S MY THOUGHTS ON IT.
WELL, NOT HEARING OTHERWISE THAT, THAT THAT'D BE THE RULING THEN OF THE BOARD.
MR, WHAT WAS, WHAT, WHAT IS THE RULING? SO THE RULING WOULD BE THAT THE, THE, UH, NOVEMBER, UH, EXAMINATION, UH, ANNOUNCEMENT WOULD BE, WOULD BE ADMITTED.
THE 2022, UH, EXAMINATION ANNOUNCEMENT WON'T BE ADMITTED.
SO FOR MR. SNYDER AND, AND FOR THE BOARD'S PURPOSE, PAGES NINE THROUGH 17, UH, ARE, ARE NOT ADMITTED, JOHN.
UH, SO MR. DAVIS, WE'RE GOING BACK TO, TO PAGE FOUR HERE, UH, ON, ON THE EXHIBITS.
UH, CAN YOU TELL US WHAT THIS IS? YES.
THIS IS A PROMOTIONAL ANNOUNCEMENT THAT FOR THE FIRE LIEUTENANT EXAM, UM, THE ADMINISTRATION THAT WAS HELD ON NOVEMBER 17TH.
AND THIS, TELL US WHAT THESE NOTICES ARE LIKE.
THE CIVIL SERVICE PUT THESE OUT.
UM, WHEN, AS MR. SOLID TESTIFIED EARLIER, THOSE WHO ARE INTERESTED IN COMPETING FOR, UM, A PROMOTIONAL EXAMINATION, THEY CAN MAKE THEIR PROMOTIONAL APPLICATION, UM, PERFECT IN NEO.
FROM THERE, WE SCREEN THEM TO, TO DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT THEY HAVE ENOUGH QUALIFYING TIME IN THE RANK.
AND THEN FROM THERE, WE START THE COMMUNICATION PROCESS WITH THEM ABOUT THE EXAM.
THIS IS THE, THE ANNOUNCEMENT THAT ANNOUNCES THE ADMINISTRATION OF THE EXAM, THE, THE APPLICATION TO TAKE THAT EXAM, HOW IT WILL TAKE PLACE, WHAT ARE THE EXPECTATIONS IF YOU NEED A REASONABLE ACCOMMODATION UNDER THE AMERICANS WITH DIS WITH DISABILITY ACT.
ALL OF THAT'S CONTAINED IN THE PROMOTIONAL EXAM ANNOUNCEMENT.
SO IN OTHER WORDS, IT'S DESIGNED TO GIVE, UM, AN APP OR ANYONE WHO HAS AN INTEREST IN COMPETING IN A PROMOTIONAL EXAMINATION, THE INFORMATION THEY NEED TO, TO, TO, TO SIGN UP AND, AND BE PREPARED, OTHERWISE ALSO COVERS, AS WELL AS THE SOURCE MATERIAL OF WHAT, WHAT AREAS FROM A, FROM A TECHNICAL PERSPECTIVE WILL BE COVERED ON THE TEST.
AND SO IT GIVES YOU THE WHOLE HOST OF INFORMATION YOU NEED, UM, IN ORDER TO BE PREPARED FOR, FOR A PROMOTIONAL EXAM.
AND IN PART OF, PART OF THIS NOTICE AND IN PREPARATION FOR APPLICANTS, IS THERE ANYTHING IN THIS NOTICE THAT STATES THAT CELL PHONES ARE FORBIDDEN AT THE EXAMINATION? WHAT WE LEARNED, UM, NO.
TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, SIMPLY IN THIS 2020 NOTICE, UM, THERE WAS NOTHING IN THIS WRITTEN NOTICE THAT PROHIBITED AN INDIVIDUAL THAT EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED AN INDIVIDUAL FROM, UM, HAVING IN THEIR POSSESSION, UM, A, A CELL PHONE.
NOW, THERE WAS ANOTHER ADMINISTRATION OF THE LIEUTENANT PROMOTIONAL EXAM THAT WAS, THAT WAS EXPECTED.
IS THAT RIGHT? I'M SORRY, I, I'M NOT SURE.
I FOLLOWED THERE, THERE, THERE WAS A SECOND ADMINISTRATION OF THIS LIEUTENANT PROMOTIONAL EXAM THAT WAS EXPECTED, RIGHT? WELL, YES, THERE WERE, UM, WE KNEW GOING INTO THIS ADMINISTRATION THAT IT WAS LIKELY THAT WE WERE GOING TO HAVE A SECOND ADMINISTRATION OF THIS EXAM GIVEN THE COVID ENVIRONMENT THAT WE WERE IN, AND THE NUMBER OF MEMBERS WHO COULD NOT SIT FOR THIS EXAM, UM, DUE DUE TO BEING OUT OR IN QUARANTINE OR SOMETHING CONNECTED THERE TOO.
SO I, WE'VE REFERRED TO THIS AS A, AS A, AS A MAKEUP EXAMINATION.
BUT, BUT LET ME ASK YOU, IN YOUR, IN YOUR EXPERIENCE AS, UH, ADMIN BEING THE ADMINISTRATION FOR THE EXAMS, IS IT COMMON FOR THERE TO BE AN, AN ADDITIONAL ADMINISTRATION OF AN EXAMINATION PROMOTIONAL EXAMINATION? I, I, I WOULD SAY THAT IT IS COMMON TO HAVE, UM, ANOTHER ADMINISTRATION OR A MAKEUP ADMINISTRATION OF AN EXAM FOR VARIOUS REASONS.
I WOULD SAY WHAT MADE THIS UNIQUE IS, UM, THE NUMBER OF INDIVIDUALS THAT WERE IMPACTED OR THAT NEEDED ANOTHER, ANOTHER ADMINISTRATION, BUT, BUT ROUTINE NONETHELESS, TO ANSWER YOUR, YOUR QUESTION, YES.
AND I THINK THAT THIS NOTICE SPECIFIES THAT, OR ANTICIPATES THAT THERE'S GONNA BE COVID 19 DIFFICULTIES, BUT FOR PEOPLE SITTING
[00:45:01]
FOR THAT SECOND ADMINISTRATION, THE EXAM, WAS IT ONLY LIMITED TO PEOPLE WHO HAD COVID 19? NO, I, I, NO, I THINK THAT WE HAD DIFFERENT, I MEAN, THERE'S ALWAYS DIFFERENT REASONS AS TO WHY, UM, INDIVIDUALS MAY I, I DON'T HAVE THEM ALL COMMITTED TO MEMORY OR, OR ANY ANALYSIS OF WHO ALL PARTICIPATED AND WHERE WERE THEIR REASONS TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION.SO THERE COULD BE ANOTHER SICKNESS, OR I THINK YOU'VE MENTIONED TO ME BEFORE, AND CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, THAT, YOU KNOW, SOME PEOPLE ARE ON MILITARY RESERVE AND THEY MIGHT BE DEPLOYED OR THEY MIGHT, UH, HAVE OTHER COMMITMENTS.
AND SO THOSE PEOPLE, UH, TAKE AN, AN, UH, THE SECOND ADMINISTRATION OF THE EXAM OR THE MAKEUP ADMINISTRATION, SO TO SPEAK, CORRECT.
IS THAT CORRECT? AND SO EMPLOYEE ELIGIBLE EMPLOYEES ARE NOT AVAILABLE FOR THE FIRST ADMINISTRATION.
THEY CAN TAKE UP AN ADMIN, A MAKEUP ADMINISTRATION OF THE EXAM AT A LATER DATE.
CAN I POINT YOU TO EXHIBIT THREE, WHICH IS YOUR, UM, IT'S, IT'S BASE NUMBER THREE.
UH, IF YOU RECOGNIZE THIS, TELL US WHAT IT'S, THIS IS A JANUARY 17TH RESPONSE, UM, TO A SECONDARY RESPONSE TO MR. SALAS GRIEVANCE.
UM, IN, IN MY RESPONSE TO MR. SALAS INITIAL GRIEVANCE, I MADE THE DETERMINATION THAT IT WAS NOT A TIMELY GRIEVANCE, UM, GIVEN FROM WHEN THE, UM, UH, UH, ALLEGED, UM, VIOLATION OCCURRED TO ME, TO OUR OFFICE BEING MADE AWARE OF IT IN TERMS OF THE TIMELINESS.
SO THAT'S NUMBER, THAT'S, THAT'S NUMBER ONE.
UM, AND SO I MADE THAT DETERMINATION.
THEY, HE WROTE ME BACK AND, AND HAD SOME ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS AND, AND WANTED TO MAKE SURE HE WANTED TO CONTINUE THIS FORWARD.
AND SO THIS IS ME RECONSIDERING, UH, MY ORIGINAL DETERMINATION AND OPENING IT BACK UP SO WE COULD CONTINUE THIS CONVERSATION TODAY.
UM, SO CAN YOU TELL US JUST YOUR THOUGHT PROCESS IN TERMS OF MAKING THIS DETERMINATION? ULTIMATELY, YOU SAY AT THE LAST PARAGRAPH, I DO NOT FIND THIS GRIEVANCE IN YOUR FAVOR.
CAN YOU TELL US SORT OF YOUR, YOUR REASONS BEHIND THAT? WELL, SO NUMBER, NUMBER, NUMBER ONE, I DO NOT, I DID NOT FIND THAT THE CIVIL SERVICE DEPARTMENT ACTED IN VIOLATION OF THE RULE, THAT QUESTION.
UM, WHAT WE HAD WAS AN INDIVIDUAL WHO NOT, UH, SITTING ASIDE THE TIMING, THE, THE TIMING ISSUE, I THINK I'VE EXPLAINED THAT, BUT AT THE CORE OF THE QUESTION OF WHETHER OR NOT THE RULE VIOLATED IN MY ANALYSIS, THE FACTS WERE THESE, YOU HAD AN INDIVIDUAL WHO CAME IN, UNBEKNOWNST TO THEM, THEY HAD A CELL PHONE IN, IN THEIR, IN THEIR POSSESSION, UM, BEFORE THE EXAM ADMINISTRATION BEGAN.
UM, THAT WAS, THEY DISCLOSED THAT THEY LEFT THE EXAMINATION ROOM.
I UNDERSTOOD THE RULE TO REALLY SPEAK TO TEST SECURITY MM-HMM.
AND THAT WAS MY INTERPRETATION OF THE SPIRIT AND LETTER OF THAT RULE, RIGHT? WHY YOU WOULDN'T LET ANYONE COME BACK INTO AN ADMINISTRATION.
AND SO BASED ON THOSE DECI, BASED ON THAT THEY WERE PERMITTED IN, AND I DON'T FIND THAT IN VIOLATION, AND I DIDN'T FIND THAT FACTUALLY TO BE IN VIOLATION OF THE RULE AND RULE NUMBER.
UH, THE RULE IN QUESTION HERE, AND I'LL, I'LL READ IT AGAIN JUST FOR EVERYBODY.
NO EVIDENCE SHALL BE ADMITTED TO ANY EXAMINATION AFTER ANY CANDIDATE HAS WITHDRAWN OR LEFT THE PLACE OF EXAMINATION.
SO WHEN YOU'RE LOOKING AT THE RULE, BOTH THE LANGUAGE OF THE RULE AND THE SPIRIT OF THE RULE, LIKE HOW ARE YOU INTERPRETING EXAMINATION? IS IT MORE ABOUT THAT SPECIFIC EXAM ON THAT SPECIFIC TIME, OR IS IT JUST, YOU KNOW, LIEUTENANT PROMOTIONAL EXAM GENERAL? NO, I, I, I THINK THAT WE HAVE A PROMOTIONAL EXAMINATION, UM, WITH MULTIPLE ADMINISTRATIONS.
UM, AND SO I TOOK THE NOVEMBER 17TH TO BE AN ADMINISTRATION OF THAT EXAM, AND I THINK STAFF'S DISMISSAL OF MR. GRADY, EVEN AFTER HE DISCLOSED THAT UNDERSTANDS AND, AND, AND UNDERLINES THAT THAT WAS A PARTICULAR ADMINISTRATION, UM, OF THAT, OF THAT EXAM.
SO THAT'S HOW, UM, I'VE ORDINARILY INTERPRETED THE RULE.
AND WHEN YOU SAY YOU, YOU'RE INTERPRETING IT IN TERMS OF SECURITY, YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT YOU DON'T WANT EXAMINEES THAT HAVE PRIOR KNOWLEDGE OF THE CONTENTS OF THE EXAMS, SOMETHING LIKE THAT? CORRECT.
SO, YOU KNOW, ONCE A TEST BEGINS, IT'S, IN MY OPINION, NOT PROPER.
CAUSE THEN THAT INDIVIDUAL HAS ACCESS TO THE TEST MATERIAL.
THAT COULD BE THEN, YOU KNOW, UH, SOME FAIR, UNFAIR ADVANTAGE OR, OR ANY OTHER ITEMS THAT WOULD CHALLENGE THE TEST SECURITY ENVIRONMENT THAT WE TRY TO ENSURE, UM, FOR ALL OUR RANKS AND ALL OF
[00:50:01]
OUR EXAMINATION.IS THE IDEA IS THAT SOMEBODY CAN'T HAVE ACCESS TO THE TEXT TEST MATERIAL, LEAVE THAT PARTICULAR ADMINISTRATION, GO LOOK UP THE ANSWERS AND COME BACK AND THEN FILL IN THE ANSWERS, RIGHT.
OR SHARE THE ANSWERS OR ANYTHING ALONG THOSE LINES.
AND SO AGAIN, WE'RE LOOKING AT SECTION TWO.
ALL EXAMINATIONS SHALL BE IMPARTIAL, FAIR AND PRACTICAL, AND DESIGNED TO TEST THE RELATIVE QUALIFICATIONS AND FITNESS OF APPLICANTS TO DISCHARGE THE DUTIES OF THE PARTICULAR POSITION WHICH HE WAS FILL.
DO YOU BELIEVE THAT YOUR DECISION, UH, IS IN ACCORDANCE, UH, WITH, WITH THIS SECTION AS WELL? YES, SIR.
AND CAN YOU TELL US A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THAT IN TERMS OF, UH, HOW YOUR DECISION DOES NOT AFFECT, UH, TESTING THE RELATIVE QUALIFICATIONS OF FITNESS OF APPLICANTS TO DISCHARGE THEIR PARTICULAR DUTIES? I'M SORRY, MR. MARTIN, I DON'T THINK I FOLLOWED.
YEAH, THAT WAS, THAT WAS, THAT WAS A WORDY ONE.
UH, COULD YOU JUST FLESH THAT OUT A LITTLE BIT FOR US? AS THE IDEA OF THESE EXAMS ARE DESIGNED TO TEST PEOPLE'S FITNESS FOR THESE DUTIES, CAN YOU TELL US ABOUT LIKE WHY ALLOWING AN APPLICANT TO TAKE A LATER ADMINISTRATION ISN'T IN VIOLATION OF THAT? WELL, SO, SO OF COURSE I THINK THAT WHAT WE HAVE TO UNDERSTAND, OR WHAT I UNDERSTAND OR WHAT I THINK I UNDERSTAND IS THAT EACH, WE MAKE EVERY, WHEN WE DO A PROMOTIONAL EXAM, REGARDLESS OF THE SWORN SERVICE, REGARDLESS OF THE PROMOTIONAL RANK, WE'VE HEARD THE TESTIMONY TODAY THAT, YOU KNOW, THERE'S A LOT OF STUDYING THAT, THAT OCCURS AND TAKES PLACE.
AND SO WE LIST OUT THOSE CONTENT AREA, THOSE CONTENT AREAS THAT WILL BE COVERED.
UM, THE ACTUAL TEST ITEMS ARE MAINTAINED SECURELY.
I THINK THAT WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE DON'T EXPOSE ANYONE.
I THINK TO, TO FLUSH OUT YOUR QUESTION, WHEN WE HAVE INDIVIDUALS IN A TESTING ENVIRONMENT, WE, WE DON'T WANT THEM TO BE ABLE TO GO IN AND OUT OF THAT TESTING ENVIRONMENT.
THAT WOULD CREATE A CHALLENGE TO THE TEST SECURITY.
UM, THERE IS A OATH OF TEST SECURITY THAT EVERY TEST TAKER MUST SIGN AND AGREE TO THAT THEY WON'T DISCUSS OUTSIDE OF THE ROOM OR OUTSIDE OF THE TESTING ENVIRONMENT, ANY OF THOSE TEST ITEMS. SO THAT'S A FURTHERANCE OF, I THINK, OUR DEDICATION AND IMPORTANCE OF TEST SECURITY.
SO ALLOWING SOMEONE TO TAKE, UM, A DIFFERENT ADMINISTRATION IS NOT TO A ERODE OR DEBATE THE, THE, THE, THE TEST SECURITY COMMITMENT OR EVEN THE EVIDENCE OF TEST SECURITY.
UH, BUT IN THAT INSTANCE, IN, IN THE WAY THE RULE IS WRITTEN AND HAS BEEN INTERPRETED AND ENFORCED, WE LOOK AT IT FROM AN ADMINISTRATION PERSPECTIVE, UM, OF THE TEST.
AND SO I HOPE THAT FLESHES OUT AND ANSWERS YOUR QUESTION, BUT THAT, THAT WAS MY OPINION.
AND JUST TO CLARIFY, IN THE RULE, YOU KNOW, YOU'RE LOOKING AT PLACE OF EXAMINATION AND YOU'RE LOOKING AT, YOU'RE INTERPRETING THAT IN TERMS OF THAT PARTICULAR LOCATION OF THAT ADMINISTRATION EXAM.
AND MR. GRADY OR ANYBODY ELSE WAS NOT ACTUALLY ALLOWED BACK INTO THAT SPECIFIC PLACE OF EXAMINATION ON THAT DATE, RIGHT? NO.
SO LASTLY, SO YOU HAVE AN INTERPRETATION OF EXAMINATION.
I THINK YOU DESCRIBED IT AS YOU'RE LOOKING AT IT IN TERMS OF, UH, YOU KNOW, A A SPECIFIC DATE AND TIME AS OPPOSED TO AN ADMINISTRATION OF AN EXAMINATION, RIGHT? CORRECT.
SO LOOKING AT THIS RULE, SECTION SIX, MR. SALA MAY INTERPRET IT ANOTHER WAY, MAY INTERPRET IT A, AS THAT SPECIFIC, THAT PROMOTIONAL EXAM AT ANY TIME DURING THAT PERIOD, BUT ULTIMATELY, IT'S YOUR RESPONSIBILITY TO INTERPRET THE CIVIL SERVICE RULES, RIGHT? CORRECT.
AND IS THERE ANYWHERE IN THE CIVIL SERVICE RULES THAT EXAMINATION THAT YOUR INTERPRETATION OF EXAMINATION IS CONTRADICTED? UM, NOT TO MY KNOWLEDGE.
ANY QUESTIONS FOR MR. DAVIS? I CAN'T HEAR YOU, MR. SNYDER.
SO THE DAY THAT THE TEST WAS GIVEN THERE ON NOVEMBER 17TH, 2020, YOU WERE, YOU WERE PRESENT THAT DAY, RIGHT? I WAS AT CITY HALL, BUT I WAS NOT AT THE EXAMINATION PLACE OF EXAMINATION.
DID YOU KNOW ABOUT THE, UM, MR. UH, I THINK HIS NAME IS MR. BRADY, DID YOU KNOW ABOUT THIS PERSON BEING REMOVED FROM THE EXAMINATION AREA? YES, SIR.
SO YOU, SO YOU WERE BEING, YOU WERE BEING ADVISED THAT, UM, MR. GRADY WAS INSIDE THE EXAMINATION AREA AND THAT HE WAS BEING, UH, REMOVED FROM THE EXAM BECAUSE HE HAD A CELL PHONE IN HIS, IN HIS POSSESSION.
I WOULD TESTIFY THIS MORNING, MR. SNYDER, THAT,
[00:55:01]
UM, A MEMBER OF STAFF CONTACTED ME SHORTLY AFTER MR. UM, GRADY HAD BEEN, HAD LEFT THE SITE OF THE TESTING AND EXPLAINED TO ME THE FACTS LEADING UP TO HIS DEPARTURE.WELL, I WAS JUST, SO YOU, YOU SAID, I THINK YOU SAID YOU WERE THERE, YOU WERE CALLED DURING, I THINK YOU SAID REAL TIME.
WELL, WERE YOU INVOLVED IN THE DECISION TO REMOVE MR. GRADY? NO, I WAS NOT INVOLVED IN THE DECISION TO REMOVE MR. GRADY.
IT, IT HAPPENED JUST PERHAPS REAL TIME ISN'T THE, JUST AS IT HAD OCCURRED.
SO, BUT THE STAFF MEMBER, UM, WHICH YOU WERE ADVISED LIKE SHORTLY
AND THEN YOU MENTIONED, UH, EARLIER, UH, I THINK WE WERE TALKING ABOUT, UM, THE DE IT WAS YOUR UNDERSTANDING THAT THE, THE ADMINISTRATION OF THE TEST HAD NOT YET THE GUN WHEN, UH, MR. GRADY WAS REMOVED.
IS THAT RIGHT? THAT IS CORRECT.
AND THEN I, I, I THINK YOU TESTIFIED THAT, UM, MR. GRADY DIDN'T HAVE TIME TO GO TAKE HIS CELL PHONE, LEAVE IT OUTSIDE, AND THEN REENTER, IS THAT RIGHT? THAT IS CORRECT.
AND WHY WAS THAT? I DON'T RECALL THE EXACT REASON AS TO WHY.
I DON'T KNOW IF IT WAS BECAUSE IT WAS SO CLOSE TO THE, TO THE START TIME OF THE EXAM.
UM, I, I, I, I REALLY DON'T KNOW.
I DO REMEMBER THAT SHORTLY AFTER THAT HAPPENING, UM, A MEMBER OF ONE OF THE FIRE ASSOCIATIONS ASKING WHY COULDN'T THAT HAVE BEEN A SIMPLE SOLUTION, UM, TO ALLOW MR. GRADY TO, UH, ACTUALLY SIT FOR THAT ADMINISTRATION OF THE EXAM.
BUT, BUT NEVERTHELESS, I DON'T KNOW THE EXACT REASON AS TO WHAT PROHIBITED HIM FROM BEING ABLE TO GO TO HIS CAR AND JUST SIMPLY COME BACK AND TAKE THE EXAMINATION, WHICH WAS KIND OF REALLY THE QUESTION ALL ALONG.
YOU JUST MENTIONED SOMETHING FROM A FIRE ASSOCIATION ASKING A QUESTION ABOUT HIM BEING READMITTED ON THE SAME DAY.
WHAT IS THAT? IS THAT SOMETHING THAT HAPPENED THAT DAY, OR IS THAT SOMETHING THAT HAPPENED LATER? I THINK THAT WAS LATER.
YEAH, I DON'T, I'M ASKING YOU LIKE YOUR UNDERSTANDING OF, OF THAT DAY.
SO NOW, UM, WHEN THE, I, I SEE FROM THE ANNOUNCEMENT THAT THE, THAT THE, IT LOOKS LIKE THE DOORS OPEN AND APPLICANT OR TEST TAKERS CAN COME IN AT 9:00 AM IS THAT RIGHT? CORRECT.
AND THEN IT HAD ON THERE THAT THE TEST BEGINS AT 10:00 AM IS THAT RIGHT? YES.
SO ON THAT DAY, IS THERE LIKE A, UH, CUTOFF, UH, TIME THAT PEOPLE CAN SHOW UP AND ENTER THE BUILDING? OKAY.
IF YOU LOOK ON THE VERY NEXT PAGE, UM, WE TRIED TO ENSURE THAT WE STAGGERED.
I THINK YOU ALSO HAVE TO UNDERSTAND THE NUMBER OF TEST TAKERS THAT WERE WITH THE LIEUTENANT EXAMINATION GIVEN THE ENVIRONMENT OF COVID.
SO WHAT WE DID TO ENSURE SOME SAFETY, WE WANTED TO SEPARATE THEM OUT IN GROUP BY LAST NAME.
IF YOU NOTICE ON PAGE FIVE, IT'S LABELED PAGE FIVE.
AND SO YOU KIND OF SEE MR. GRADY WOULD'VE BEEN CHECKING IN SOMEWHERE BETWEEN NINE 30 AND 10 BASED ON HIS LAST NAME.
SO THIS WAS ALL ABOUT OUR PHYSICAL PROXIMITY SPACING AND, AND ALL OF THAT.
SO TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, HE WOULD'VE BEEN CHECKING IN SOMEWHERE BETWEEN NINE 30 AND 10.
SO HE COULD HAVE COME IN, ACCORDING TO THIS, HE COULD HAVE ENTERED THE TEST AREA UP UNTIL 10:00 AM RIGHT? CORRECT.
BUT THEN ON THE PREVIOUS PAGE THAT LOOKS LIKE IT SAYS THE TEST IS TO BE GIVEN AT 10:00 AM CORRECT? CORRECT.
AND THEN, UH, YOU'RE LOOKING THERE ON PAGE, YOU SHOWED ME PAGE FIVE THERE, WHERE IT'S THE CHECK-IN PROCESS.
UM, AND IF YOU TURN TO THE NEXT PAGE ON PAGE SIX, UH, IT SAYS IMPORTANT DATES THERE.
AND THE FIRST ONE IS THIS ORIENTATION VIDEO POSTED, SENT TO CANDIDATES.
AND, UM, ON ON THAT VIDEO, THAT'S THE VIDEO THAT INSTRUCTED CANDIDATES
[01:00:01]
TO BRING IN CELL PHONES, CORRECT? THERE IS A, THERE IS A PROHIBITION REFERENCE IN, IN THAT VIDEO THAT PROHIBITED CELL PHONES, UM, IN THE TESTING ENVIRONMENT.HOWEVER, THE ANNOUNCEMENT DID NOT, THIS WAS THIS, UH, THE DOCUMENT WE'RE LOOKING AT HERE, I GUESS THAT I INCLUDES PAGE SIX.
WAS THIS AVAILABLE TO ALL THE CANDIDATES OR THE TEST TAKERS? YES.
THIS IS, THIS IS THE ANNOUNCEMENT THAT WENT TO, THAT WENT OUT CONCERNING THE EXAM.
SO TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, YES.
AND THEN IT SAYS HERE ON PAGE SIX THAT A LINK WILL BE SENT TO CANDIDATES VIA EMAIL, RIGHT? CORRECT.
AND YOU HEARD MR. UH, SOLE TESTIFY THAT, THAT HE LOOKED AT THIS VIDEO, CORRECT? CORRECT.
SO, UM, IF, UH, AND YOU, AND YOU SPOKE ABOUT, UH, KIND OF THE GENERAL, THE OVERALL, THE PURPOSE, OF COURSE, TRY AND IDENTIFY THE BEST CANDIDATES, FAIR TESTING AND ALL THAT.
AND YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT THE INTEGRITY OF THE TEST MATERIAL, I BELIEVE.
UM, AND THAT YOU, YOU STATED THAT NONE OF THE MATERIAL THAT, THAT MR. GRADY, WHEN HE WAS REMOVED, NONE OF THE TEST TAKING MATERIAL WOULD'VE BEEN AVAILABLE, OR HE WOULD'VE BEEN EXPOSED TO HIM AT THE TIME THAT HE LEFT THE TESTING AREA.
IS THAT CORRECT? THAT IS CORRECT.
AND IF YOU WEREN'T THERE, HOW DID YOU KNOW THAT? BECAUSE THAT WAS ONE OF THE FIRST CONFIRMATIONS THAT I WANTED TO CONFIRM FROM THE MANAGER OVER THE AREA WHERE WERE WE IN THE ACTUAL TESTING PROCESS.
SO, UM, IF THAT'S THE CASE, AND YOU'RE TALKING TO, UM, THE, YOUR STAFF, LIKE AT, JUST, JUST AS IT'S OCCURRED OR JUST AFTER IT OCCURRED, WHY DIDN'T YOU TELL YOUR STAFF TO ALLOW MR. GRADY BACK IN TO THE BUILDING? BECAUSE THE TEST HAD ALREADY A STARTED, UM, WHICH WAS KIND OF WHAT I WAS ALLUDING TO IN MY RESPONSE BACK, BACK TO YOU EARLIER, IS THAT WAS THE FIRST QUESTION.
THAT IF THIS IS SOMETHING SO EASILY CURED AND CAN BE CURED, WHY, WHY NOT? BUT THE SHORT OF IT IS, UM, HE'D LEFT THE PLACE OF TESTING, SO WASN'T ADMITTABLE THE TEST WAS, WAS NOT ADMISSIBLE BACK INTO THE TEST NUMBER ONE, THEN NUMBER TWO, IT, IT ALREADY TEST HAD, HAD ALREADY STARTED GIVEN HIS CHECK-IN TIME AND 10 O'CLOCK AND WE'D STARTED THE TEST.
SO YOU, YOU, YOU'RE, YOU'RE SAYING THAT BECAUSE MR. GRADY HAD LEFT CAUSE OF THE RULE, HE COULDN'T COME BACK IN TO THAT PARTICULAR ADMINISTRATION AND COUPLED WITH THE FACT THAT THE TEST HAD ALREADY STARTED AT THAT TIME? BY THAT TIME.
MR. MARTIN, DO YOU HAVE ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS FOR MR. DAVIS? NO, THANK YOU MR. DAVIS.
AND MR. MARTIN, IF YOU WANNA CALL YOUR NEXT WITNESS.
UH, THE CITY HAS NO FURTHER WITNESSES AT THIS TIME.
UH, SO BOTH SIDES HAVE CONCLUDED THEIR PRESENTATIONS.
WOULD THAT BE FAIR TO SAY? MR. SNYDER? MR. MARTIN? YES, SIR.
UH, CERTAINLY CONCLUDED THE PRESENTATION OF, UH, WITNESSES AND EVIDENCE, BUT I IMAGINE BOTH MR. SNYDER AND I HAVE OKAY.
OPPORTUNITY TO SAY, JUST DRONE ON FOR A LITTLE BIT LONGER.
UM, MR. SNYDER, THEN, I KNOW YOU'D PROBABLY TO GIVE A SHORT CLOSING STATEMENT, AS WOULD YOU, MR. MARTIN, AND PLEASE DO SO AT THIS TIME, MR. SNYDER.
UH, MY CLIENT IS, UM, WITHOUT QUESTION, I THINK IT'S CLEARLY ESTABLISHED THAT HE'S QUALIFIED FOR THE, TO PROMOTE TO THE POSITION OF LIEUTENANT.
HE WAS IN THAT PROCESS, AND HE UNFAIRLY GOT DENIED A PROMOTION.
[01:05:01]
THIS ONE, THIS DECISION TO ALLOW MR. GRADY TO TAKE A TEST AFTER HE WAS REMOVED.NOW, UH, THE EVIDENCE HAS SHOWN YOU THAT THE APP, THE, THE TEST TAKERS THAT DAY HAD BEEN INFORMED VIA THIS VIDEO LINK THAT THEY WERE NOT TO BRING CELL PHONES, THAT THEY WERE PROHIBITED ITEMS. UH, MR. BRADY BROUGHT ONE IN, I MEAN, MR. BRADY, EXCUSE ME, BROUGHT ONE IN.
HE WAS REMOVED BY THE STAFF THAT DAY, AND HE WAS NOT ALLOWED TO GO OUT, UH, PLACED IT IN A VEHICLE AND, AND REENTER THE TEST TAKING AREA.
UM, LATER, AND THIS IS, UH, UM, LATER, HE WAS ALLOWED TO TAKE ANOTHER, THIS MAKEUP TEST.
AND WE THINK THAT, UH, THAT'S CLEARLY, UM, A VIOLATION BECAUSE WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE RULE, IT SAYS, NO APPLICANT SHALL BE ADMITTED TO ANY EXAMINATION.
ANY CANDIDATE HAS WITHDRAWN OR LEFT THE PLACE OF EXAMINATION.
IT'S NOT DISPUTED THAT MR. GRADY LEFT THE PLACE OF EXAMINATION.
IT DOESN'T SAY THE EXAMINATION.
IT DOESN'T SAY THIS PARTICULAR EXAMINATION THAT HE'S LEFT.
IT DOESN'T CONTEMPLATE THAT, THAT, UH, THAT THE, UH, CIVIL SERVICE STAFF HAS TO DO AN ANALYSIS ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT, UH, MR. GRADY HAD ANY ACCESS TO TEST TAKING MATERIAL, IS THE FACT THAT HE HEARD, UH, THAT HE LEFT IT.
AND THEN THE ONLY TIME YOU'RE GONNA LEAVE A PLACE OF EXAMINATION IS IF YOU DO SO BECAUSE YOU CHOOSE TO DO SO, OR YOU DO SO BECAUSE YOU'RE FORCED TO DO SO, AND YOU'RE FORCED TO DO SO WHEN YOU VIOLATE THE PROCEDURE OF THE POLICIES.
AND THAT'S WHAT HAPPENED WITH MR. GRADY.
HE BROUGHT IN A PROHIBITED ITEM.
HE WAS FORCED TO LEAVE THE AREA.
AND THEN BECAUSE OF, BECAUSE OF HIS, UH, YOU KNOW, HE OBJECTED TO THIS AND HE WAS ALLOWED TO TAKE ANOTHER EXAMINATION.
HE WAS ALLOWED TO TAKE ANOTHER, AN ANY EXAMINATION, HE WAS ALLOWED TO TAKE IT.
AND BECAUSE OF THIS, UM, HE GOT ON THE, HE GOT ON THE LIST IN A HIGHER POSITION THAN MY CLIENT, THAN MY CLIENT MISSED PROMOTION BY ONE POSITION.
SO WE THINK, UH, THAT IT'S CLEAR VIOLATION OF CIVIL SERVICE RULES.
MY CLIENT IS ASKING THAT HE BE PROMOTED RETROACTIVELY TO THE DATE THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN PROMOTED OFF OF THIS LIST OF 50 FROM THE TEST IN NOVEMBER 20.
UH, MR. SNYDER, THIS IS GREG MARTIN.
I THINK WE MAY HAVE LOST MR. WELCH.
OH, HE LOST HIS, I CAN SEE EVERYWHERE.
SORRY TO INTERRUPT YOUR AUDIO WISE.
I'M SORRY, MRS. I DIDN'T MEAN INTERRUPT, INTERRUPT YOUR CHAIN OF TRAIN OF THOUGHT.
I WAS JUST, I WAS JUST, UH, I ENDED WHEN YOU, UH, WHEN YOU SPOKE UP.
I, IF, IF, UH, IN CASE YOU TALKED OVER ME, I MEAN, THE, THE LAST THING I SAID IS THAT IS WHAT MY CLIENT THINKS HE FAIRLY DESERVES.
HE DESERVES TO BE PROMOTED RETROACTIVELY, UH, TO THE, TO THE POSITION OF LIEUTENANT ON THE DATE THAT HE WOULD'VE BEEN PROMOTED ON THE, ON THE LIST FROM THE TEST FROM NOVEMBER.
MR. MARTIN, UH, THANK YOU, MR. WELCH.
UH, OUR POSITION IS THAT, UM, MR. DAVIS CORRECTLY INTERPRETED THE RULE, UH, AS, AS HE TESTIFIED, UH, FOR THIS RULE FOR THE ADMINISTRATION OF THE EXAMS. THE IDEA IS SECURITY.
THE IDEA IS THAT PEOPLE CAN'T, UH, UH, UH, GO AGAINST THE INTEGRITY EXAM BY LOOKING UP ANSWERS OR TALKING TO OTHER PEOPLE ABOUT ANSWERS.
AND EVEN IF WE ACCEPT THAT MR. GRADY, UH, DID LEAVE THE PLACE, THAT PLACE OF EXAMINATION AT THAT DAY, UH, PRIOR TO GETTING ANY EXAM MATERIALS, THERE'S NO WAY HE COULD HAVE DONE THAT.
AND SO THE INTEGRITY AND SECURITY OF THE EXAM WAS NOT THREATENED BY ALLOWING HIM TO SIT FOR THE SECOND ADMINISTRATION OF THAT EXAM THAT WAS ALREADY PLANNED.
I THINK THE LANGUAGE OF THE RULES SPECIFIC ABOUT THAT PLACE OF EXAM OR THE PLACE OF EXAMINATION, AND HE WAS NOT ALLOWED BACK IN THE PLACE OF EXAMINATION AT THAT TIME.
HE JUST SAT FOR A SECOND ADMINISTRATION OF THE EXAM, AS MR. DAVIS TESTIFIED.
I WOULD, I WOULD JUST ALSO LIKE TO ADD THAT, YOU KNOW, I UNDERSTAND IF YOU LOOK AT THE RULE AND, AND, AND, AND THINK, YOU KNOW, I COULD KINDA SEE IT BOTH WAYS.
IT'S, I COULD SEE IT BEING A LITTLE BIT AMBIGUOUS.
I COULD KIND OF, YOU KNOW, MR. SNYDER MAKES SOME GOOD POINTS.
MR. UH, MARTIN MAKES SOME GOOD POINTS.
IT'S MR. DAVIS' JOB TO INTERPRET THAT FOR THE CIVIL SERVICE BOARD.
AND HE INTERPRETED IT THE BEST OF HIS ABILITY IN THE LANGUAGE OF THE SPIRIT OF THE EXAM.
AND SO EVEN IF YOU LOOK AT IT AND THINK, YEAH, IT COULD KIND OF GO EITHER WAY, THAT'S STILL NOT A REASON TO, UH, TO, TO OVERTURN MR. DAVIS'S DETERMINATION.
UM, THE LAST THING I'LL SAY IS JUST WITH REGARDS TO THE REMEDY REQUESTED,
[01:10:02]
UH, YOU KNOW, MR. SALI IS OBVIOUSLY ASKING TO BE PROMOTED TO LIEUTENANT.UH, I DON'T KNOW IF THIS NECESSARILY MEANS THAT SOMEBODY, I ASSUME MR. GRADY WOULD BE DEMOTED BACK TO HIS ORIGINAL POSITION.
OTHERWISE, WE HAVE MORE LIEUTENANTS THAN, UH, THAT THAN THE, THE FIRE DEPARTMENT ACTUALLY HAS PUT UP ELIGIBLE FOR PROMOTION.
AND HE'S ALSO ASKING TO BE PAID FOR SERVICES HE DIDN'T PERFORM FOR, FOR THE DIFFERENCE IN PAY FROM, FROM WHEN HE WOULD'VE BEEN PROMOTED, UH, WHEN THAT 50TH PERSON WAS PROMOTED.
I DON'T THINK THAT'S A REASONABLE REMEDY HERE.
UH, AND THE ONE THING I'LL JUST ADD TO THAT IS, AS WE SAID AT THE OUTSET, UH, GRIEVANCE HAS A BURDEN OF PROOF FOR PURPOSES OF THE CIVIL, CIVIL CIVIL SERVICE BOARD GRIEVANCE APPEAL.
MR. SALLY TESTIFIED THAT HE WAS 51, UH, ON THE, ON THE PROMOTION LIST, AND THAT 50 PEOPLE WERE, WERE PROMOTED AHEAD OF THAT.
APPARENTLY THERE'S A PUBLICLY AVAILABLE LIST.
ANYBODY COULD JUST LOOK UP ANYBODY DO THIS.
BUT ALL WE KNOW IS JUST WHAT HE SAYS.
LIKE THE IDEA THAT THE CIVIL SERVICE BOARD SHOULD NOW PROMOTE HIM TO LIEUTENANT JUST BASED ON HIS WORD, THAT HE WOULD'VE BEEN PROMOTED ANYWAY, UH, I DON'T THINK IS, IS, IS, IS, IS ENOUGH TO MEET THAT BURDEN TO SHOW THAT THIS IS THE REMEDY THAT, THAT THE CIVIL SERVICE BOARD SHOULD CONSIDER.
AND SO FOR THOSE REASONS, I WOULD ASK THE CIVIL SERVICE BOARD TO, TO SUPPORT MR. DAVIS' DETERMINATION THAT THE CIVIL SERVICE RULES WERE FOLLOWED AND, UH, THAT THE GRIEVANCE WAS PROPERLY HEARD.
UH, FOR THAT CONCLUDES THE HEARING TODAY.
OUR NEXT ITEM ON OUR AGENDA IS ACTION ITEMS. TAKE ANY NECESSARY ACTION IN CONNECTION WITH A GRIEVANCE APPEAL HEARING, MR. ABDU RA RAHIM SALI.
UH, AND THIS IS NOW TIME FOR THE BOARD'S CONSIDERATION.
I'M GONNA ASK, ASK YOU ALL, DID YOU RECEIVE A COPY OF THE STATEMENT OF QUESTIONS? WERE YOU, WERE, DID YOU RECEIVE THAT WITH YOUR PACKET OF MATERIALS? MAYBE YOU DID NOT.
UM, THIS IS, THIS IS GREG MARTIN.
MR. WELCH, I DON'T THINK I RECEIVED IT WITH, I, I KNOW THAT THE STATE, THE QUESTION PRESENTED WAS UPDATED, UH, FROM, FROM THE LAST ONE.
SO I DON'T THINK I RE I DON'T KNOW IF I RECEIVED AN UPDATED VERSION OF THAT.
I, I, I, I DON'T KNOW IF THERE, I DIDN'T, I DON'T KNOW IF THERE WAS AN UPDATED VERSION.
I JUST HAD ONE IN, IN MATERIALS TODAY.
UM, LET ME JUST READ TO THE BOARD WHAT THE QUESTION IS.
UH, IT'S CALLED IN THE GRIEVANCE HEARING ABDUL RAHEEM SOLE UNDER THE CODE OF CODE OF RULES AND REGULATIONS OF THE SI, CITY OF DALLAS CIVIL SERVICE BOARD, RULE EIGHT, CONDUCT OF EXAMINATION SECTION SIX STATES THAT NO APPLICANT SHALL BE ADMITTED TO ANY EXAMINATION AFTER ANY CANDIDATE HAS WITHDRAWN OR LEFT THE PLACE OF EXAMINATION.
AND THE QUESTION IS, DID MR. MR. SALI OF THE DALLAS FIRE RESCUE DEPARTMENT ESTABLISHED BY A PREPONDERANCE OF THE EVIDENCE THAT THE CIVIL SERVICE DEPARTMENT VIOLATED THE ABOVE STATED RULE BY ALLOWING AN INELIGIBLE MEMBER TO TAKE THE DALLAS FIRE RESCUE LIEUTENANT'S PROMOTIONAL WRITTEN TEST? SO IF WE VOTE EITHER A OR NAY, AN A IS BASICALLY IN FAVOR OF MR. SLE, A NAY IS, IS NOT IN FAVOR OF MR. SOLE.
IF I HAVE INTERPRETED THAT CORRECTLY, IF ANYBODY HAS ANY OBJECTION TO THAT INTERPRETATION, PLEASE LEMME KNOW.
BUT THIS IS A TIME FOR DELIBERATION BY THE BOARD.
AND, UM, UM, IF, IF THE BOARD DOESN'T MIND, I'M GONNA START OFF ANYBODY, UNLESS SOMEONE HAS AN OBJECTION TO THAT WITH, WITH MY THOUGHTS.
UM, AND I, I, I AM INCLINED TO VOTE NAY ON THIS AND NOT IN FAVOR OF THE GRIEVANCE.
AND MY, MY REASONS ARE AS FOLLOWS.
FIRST OFF, I KNOW UNDER THE APPEALS PROVISION THAT THERE WAS A 10 DAY PERIOD TO APPEAL IN 10 DAYS RUNS FROM A PERSON.
I THINK WHEN THEY, WHEN THEY FOUND, WHEN THEY KNEW OR FOUND OUT ABOUT SOMETHING, UM, I'M GONNA TAKE FOR THE SAKE OF ARGUMENT THAT THE APPEAL WAS TIMELY FILED EVEN THOUGH IT WAS SEVERAL YEARS LATER.
UM, THAT WASN'T REALLY ESTABLISHED TO, TO MY SATISFACTION, BUT I'M GONNA TAKE THAT AS, AS GRANTED.
AND THAT, AND THAT WE HAVE A, UH, WE DON'T HAVE AN, UH, A JURISDICTIONAL ISSUE FOR ME WHEN I READ SECTION SIX OF, UH, RULE EIGHT OF THE CIVIL SERVICE RULES.
I MEAN, AGAIN, THIS HAS BEEN STATED SEVERAL TIMES.
SECTION SIX SAYS, NO APPLICANT SHALL BE ADMITTED TO ANY EXAMINATION AFTER ANY CANDIDATE HAS WITHDRAWN OR LEFT THE PLACE EXAMINATION.
IF, IF, IF I TAKE THAT SECTION, LITERALLY THOSE WORDS, THAT WOULD SEEM TO INDICATE TO ME THAT NO ONE CAN EVER TAKE ANOTHER PROMOTIONAL EXAMINATION EVER.
CAUSE IT SAYS NO, APPLICANT SHOULD BE ADMITTED TO ANY EXAMINATION.
AND, AND, AND THAT MEANS IF, IF SOMEWHERE DOWN THE LINE, MR. GRADY WANTS TO REAPPLY, SAY, SAY, FOR EXAMPLE, WE DO, WE DO SAY HE'S NOT PROMOTED.
HE, HE RETREATS BACK TO, TO, TO HIS, THE POSITION HE HAD BEFOREHAND, WHICH I VIEW AS A TERRIBLY UNFAIR RESULT
[01:15:01]
TO MR. GRADY.BUT NOT WITHSTANDING OF THAT, I, I MEAN, MY QUESTION IS, IF I, IF I TAKE SECTION SIX, LITERALLY, THEN MR. GRADY WOULD NEVER BE ALLOWED TO TAKE ANOTHER PROMOTIONAL EXAMINATION AGAIN.
AND I JUST, I JUST DO NOT THINK THAT IS THE INTENT OF THE RULE AT ALL IN THIS SITUATION.
MR. GRADY HAD THE CELL PHONE, UH, HE LEFT, THE TEST HAD COMMENCED WHEN HE, WHEN HE, UH, CAME BACK AND HE WASN'T ADMITTED INTO IT.
I THINK THAT'S A, UH, THE CIVIL SERVICE DEPARTMENT IS CHARGED WITH HAVING IN SECTION TWO OF THAT RULE, IMPARTIAL AND FAIR TEST EXAMINATION, UH, TESTING PRO PROCEDURES.
AND I, I, I, IN MY OPINION, WE CAN'T COME UP WITH EVERY POTENTIAL ISSUE THAT MAY ARISE DURING THE, DURING THE COURSE OF A TEST.
WE, THE BOARD RELY UPON OUR FOLKS TO ADMINISTER THE TEST FAIRLY IN THIS SITUATION.
MR. GRADY, HA, EXCUSE ME, CLEARLY HAD A CELL PHONE.
HE LEFT THE, HE LEFT THE PREMISES AND COULDN'T COME BACK AND TAKE THAT TEST, BUT HE QUALIFIED TO TAKE A TEST AT A LATER DATE.
HE DID SO, AND HE WAS PUT ON THE LIST.
THAT STRIKES ME AS A FAIR INTERPRETATION OF THE RULE.
AND, UM, I, I, I MEAN, BECAUSE WHAT WE'D HAVE TO, WHAT I, WHAT I HEAR MR. SALI SAYING, AND, AND, AND MAYBE I'M WRONG ON THIS, BUT HE WOULDN'T HAVE AN OBJECTION TO MR. GRADY TAKING A TEST AT A LATER DATE THAT WHAT WASN'T THE SAME TEST HE TOOK.
SO THERE'S A, THERE, SO, SO WHETHER THERE'S A TEST ONE AND THEN A MAKEUP FOR TEST ONE AND A SECOND MAKEUP FOR TEST ONE, MR. GRADY COULDN'T TAKE ANY OF THOSE.
HE DOESN'T APPEAR TO ARGUE THAT, WELL, TWO YEARS FROM NOW, THEY'RE DOING A COMPLETELY DIFFERENT TEST.
HE, HE, HE'S NOW OKAY TO TAKE THAT TEST.
I DON'T SEE ANYTHING IN THIS RULE THAT HAS THAT INTERPRETATION.
SO, UM, UH, AGAIN, IN MY OPINION, I, I DID HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT THE JURISDICTIONAL ISSUE, ABOUT THE 10 DAY PERIOD.
I'M GONNA ASSUME THAT'S NOT AN ISSUE.
UH, AND THAT RULE SIX TAKEN AT A, THAT IS LITERALLY WOULD NEVER ALLOW MR. GRADY TO EVER TAKE THE TEST AGAIN, WHICH I DON'T THINK IS EVER THE INTENT BY ANYBODY.
I THINK THIS RULE IS LIMITED TO THE DATE AND THE PLACE OF THE EXAMINATION.
IF SOMEONE TOOK HALF, HALF A DAY AT TEST, WALKED OUT, AND THEN CAME BACK AND SAID, I WANNA TAKE THE NEXT, THE, THE NEXT, THE MAKEUP TEST, I, I THINK I, I DON'T SEE THAT THAT IS NECESSARILY COVERED BY THESE RULES, BUT THAT, THAT SPECIFIC SITUATION IS COVERED.
BUT I THINK A FAIR AND IMPARTIAL, UH, INTERPRETATION OF THE RULES AND ALL THE INFORMATION THAT'S GIVEN TO APPLICANTS, CLEARLY IN THE CASE, THAT WOULD NEVER BE ALLOWED TO DO THAT, THAT WOULD GIVE SOMEONE AN UNFAIR ADVANTAGE.
SO I'M INCLINED TO VOTE NAY, WHICH WOULD BE AGAINST, UH, WOULD IT BE, I WOULD NOT UPHOLD THE GRIEVANCE, AND, AND I CERTAINLY WOULD NOT, UH, DO ANYTHING WITH MR. GRIE, MR. GRADY'S POSITION AT THE PRESENT TIME.
SO THOSE ARE MY THOUGHTS ON IT.
I'M, I, I'M CERTAINLY OPEN TO ANYTHING ANYBODY ELSE MAY SAY, AND A BOARD, IT'S OUR TIME TO DELIBERATE.
SO WHOEVER WANTS TO GO NEXT, PLEASE DO.
CHANDRA, IT LOOKS LIKE YOU'RE GETTING READY TO TALK
I, I CONCUR WITH YOU AS WELL, UH, MR. CHAIR.
I HAVE, I HAD SOME OF THE SAME, UH, QUESTIONS THAT, THAT WERE ANSWERED, AND SO I AGREE WITH YOU.
KYLA OR JOAN, ANY COMMENTS? WELL, THIS IS JOAN.
AND, UM, I, I'M NOT SURE I DO CONCUR WITH YOU.
I, I THINK THIS WAS AN UNFORTUNATE WORDING WITHIN THE RULES AND REGULATIONS, AND I THINK IT, IT, IT, THAT CAN BE ALSO PROVEN BY THE FACT THAT THESE, UH, THAT THESE, THIS SECTION WAS REWRITTEN AFTER THIS HAPPENED.
UM, I THINK ACCORDING TO THE, TO, TO THE SPECIFICS OF THE, OF SECTION SIX, LET'S SEE, IS IT, UH, WELL, WE KNOW WHICH SECTION WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THAT MM-HMM.
UM, UNFORTUNATELY THE LITERAL INTERPRETATION OF THAT IS THAT, UM, MR. GRADY COULD NOT COME BACK IN OR NOT TAKE A MAKEUP TEST.
AND I THINK IT WAS, IT, IT SEEMED AS THOUGH THE CIVIL SERVICE DEPARTMENT REALIZED THAT THIS WAS, UM, POSSIBLY NOT WORDED CORRECTLY OR NEEDED TO BE REVISED AND DID
[01:20:01]
SO.BUT THE, THE, UH, STATEMENT THAT WAS IN PLACE WHEN MR. SALLY TOOK THE TEST IS WHAT IS THE ORIGINAL STATEMENT.
UM, AS JOAN STATES, I THINK IT'S POORLY WORDED AND COULD BE WORDED BETTER, BUT I THINK THAT THE CIVIL SERVICE BOARD, OR THE CIVIL SERVICE DEPARTMENT'S ORIGINAL PLAN WAS TO DISQUALIFY MR. GRADY COMPLETELY FROM THIS TEST.
AND THEY DECIDED THEY COULDN'T DO THAT BECAUSE OF THE POOR WORDING OF THE ANNOUNCEMENT.
BUT HAD THAT BEEN CARRIED THROUGH WITHOUT ADVOCACY ON THE PART OF MR. GRADY, THEN THIS GRIEVANCE WOULD, WOULD HAVE BEEN PROMOTED.
UM, AND SO I, UH, WILL DISAGREE WITH THE DECISION.
I ASSUME I'M GONNA BE OUT VOTED.
I OBVIOUSLY DO NOT WANT MR. GRADY TO BE DISQUALIFIED AT THIS TIME BECAUSE THAT I DO NOT THINK THAT ISSUE IS BEFORE US.
AND I ALSO, UM, DO NOT THINK THAT THE GRIEVANCE HAS PROVEN WHAT DATE HE WOULD'VE BEEN PROMOTED FOR THE PURPOSE OF BACK PAY.
SO, ALTHOUGH I DON'T THINK THOSE ISSUES WILL BE BEFORE US, BECAUSE I THINK THAT IT'S GONNA PA YOU KNOW, THAT THE GRIEVANCE IS GOING TO BE DENIED, UM, I WOULD, YOU KNOW, FOR FUTURE REFERENCE, I WOULD HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT THERE HAD BEEN PROOF OF, UH, WHAT DATE HE WOULD HAVE BEEN PROMOTED HAD HE BEEN NUMBER 50, SO THAT WE COULD CALCULATE DAMAGES THAT THAT'S MISSING.
UM, AND ALSO I DO NOT BELIEVE THAT THE ISSUE OF MR. GRADY'S CURRENT STATUS IS REALLY BEFORE US.
AND SO IT'S, WE'RE JUST LOOKING AT THIS PARTICULAR AGREEMENT.
BOARD ANYTHING FURTHER WITH, UM, YOUR CONCURRENCES, YOU, I, I'M GOING TO MARK DOWN ON THE, ON THE STATEMENT OF THE QUESTION, VOTING NAY.
I HAVE MYSELF, MS. ACK, UH, ANGELA AND CHANDRA, AND VOTING I, JOAN AND KYLA, AND I WILL SUBMIT THAT TO THE DEPARTMENT IS BOARD.
IS THERE ANYTHING FURTHER AT THIS POINT IN TIME, HEARING NOTHING? UH, I, I WANNA THANK MR. SNYDER, MR. MARTIN, MR. SOLEY, FOR, FOR, FOR YOUR PERSEVERANCE AS WE WENT THROUGH SOME OF THE TECHNICAL ISSUES TODAY.
AND, UH, THE TIME IS NOW 1115 AND WE STAND ADJOURNED.
OUR NEXT MEETING WILL BE THE FIRST MEETING IN AUGUST.
SO ENJOY YOUR JULY OFF BOARD AND, UH, HAVE A HAPPY 4TH OF JULY.
THANK YOU ALL VERY MUCH MR. MR. WELCH, BEFORE WE GO.
YES, I JUST WANNA SAY SOMETHING FOR THE BENEFIT OF MY CLIENT.
I THINK HE WOULD APPRECIATE ME POINTING THIS OUT CUZ HE'S EXPRESSED HIS CONCERN ABOUT THIS.
HE, HE WAS NEVER, I DON'T BELIEVE WE EVER ASKED TO HAVE MR. GRADY DISQUALIFIED.
I KNOW THAT'S NOT GONNA HAPPEN.
I KNOW THE VOTE'S FINAL, BUT I DID WANT TO LET THE BOARD KNOW BECAUSE HE FELT HE WAS, HE WAS EXPRESSING A LOT OF CONCERN TO ME DURING YOUR DELIBERATION THAT THAT IS, WAS A POSSIBILITY.
UM, BUT I JUST WANTED TO LET YOU KNOW THAT IT WAS NEVER OUR INTENTION.
I DON'T THINK WE EVER ASKED FOR THAT.
AND I, I WANTED TO MAKE THAT CLEAR.
BUT OTHERWISE, THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR ALL YOUR TIME AND, AND ENDURANCE ON THIS.