City of Miami. City Hall 3500 Pan American Drive Miami, FL Meeting Minutes. Tuesday, August 1, :00 AM

Transcription

1 City of Miami City Hall 3500 Pan American Drive Miami, FL Tuesday, 10:00 AM Commission Chambers Civil Service Board Miguel M. de la O, Chairperson Jorge L. Garcia, Chief Examiner Mariano Cruz, Board Member Michael T. Dames, Board Member Florene L. Nichols, Board Member

2 PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The Civil Service Board meeting was called to order at 10:05 a.m. In attendance were the following Board Members: Present: A. APPROVING THE MINUTES OF: Motion by Member Garcia, seconded by Member Cruz, to APPROVE. PASSED by the following vote. Regular Meeting of June 20, B. B.1 PERSONNEL MATTERS Copy of a memorandum from Laura Billberry, Director, Department of Public Facilities, notifying Lilia Serrano, Administrative Aide I, of her transfer to a position at the Manuel Artime Community Center effective July 10, (NOTIFICATION) B Copy of memorandum from Mariano Loret De Mola, Director, Code Enforcement Office, requesting to extend the probationary period of Jovani Castillo, Code Enforcement Inspector, for an additional 60 days beyond September 19, Chairman de la O asked Mr. Castillo if he was aware that the department was attempting to extend his probationary period. Jovani Castillo, Code Enforcement Inspector, appeared before the Board and responded in the affirmative. Chairman de la O asked Mr. Castillo if he objected to the department's request to extend his probationary period. Mr. Castillo responded in the negative. Following discussion, the Board considered a motion to grant the Office of Code Enforcement's request to extend Mr. Jovani Castillo's probationary period 60 days beyond September 19, 2006 which resulted in the following vote: Motion by Member Garcia, seconded by Member Cruz, that this matter be APPROVED. PASSED by the following vote. City of Miami Page 1

3 B Copy of memorandum from Mariano Loret De Mola, Director, Code Enforcement Office, requesting to extend the probationary period of Gustavo Meregildo, Code Enforcement Inspector, for an additional 60 days beyond September 19, Chairman de la O asked Mr. Meregildo if he was aware that the department was attempting to extend his probationary period. Gustavo Meregildo, Code Enforcement Inspector, appeared before the Board and responded in the affirmative. Chairman de la O asked Mr. Meregildo if he had any objections to the department's request to extend his probationary period. Mr. Meregildo responded in the negative. Following discussion, the Board considered a motion to grant the Office of Code Enforcement's request to extend Mr. Gustavo Meregildo's probationary period 60 days beyond September 19, 2006 which resulted as follows: Motion by Member Garcia, seconded by Member Cruz, that this matter be APPROVED. PASSED by the following vote. B Copy of a memorandum from Rosalie Mark, Director, Department of Employee Relations, notifying Lazaro L. Chappoten, Heavy Equipment Mechanic of his return to his former classification. Lazaro L. Chappoten is being rolled back to Auto Mechanic, effective July 24, (NOTIFICATION) B Copy of a memorandum from Rosalie Mark, Director, Department of Employee Relations, accepting the request from Ryan Martinez, Automotive Equipment Operator I, Department of Public Works, for a voluntary return to his former classification of Grounds Tender, effective July 24, (NOTIFICATION) C. C.1 MILITARY LEAVES OF ABSENCE Robert A. Perez requests re-employment as a Police Officer following his return from military leave. The Board considered a motion to grant Officer Robert A. Perez' request for re-employment following his return from military leave which resulted in the following vote: Motion by Member Cruz, seconded by Member Garcia, that this matter be APPROVED. PASSED by the following vote. City of Miami Page 2

4 D. D.1 DISCIPLINARY MATTERS a Copy of the Judgment from the City Manager concurring with the Board in finding Ricardo Fernandez, Police Officer not guilty of all the charges against him in the 20-hour suspension letter, effective June 28, (NOTIFICATION) D Copy of a letter from Brett Sheptow, Attorney requesting a continuance of the hearing of appeal on behalf of Teresa Borkowski, Police Sergeant, relative to her 10-hour suspension, effective April 4, (DISCUSSION) Chairman de la O asked the City's representative if she had any objections to Attorney Sheptow's request for a continuance of the appeal hearing on behalf of his client, Sgt. Teresa Borkowski. Elsa I. Jaramillo-Velez, Assistant City Attorney, appeared before the Board and responded in the negative. Chairman de la O asked if this was the first time that Sgt. Borkowski's appeal hearing was scheduled. Attorney Sheptow responded in the affirmative. Following discussion, the Board considered a motion to grant Attorney Sheptow's request for a continuance of the appeal hearing on behalf of his client Teresa Borkowski, which resulted in the following vote: Motion by Member Cruz, seconded by Member Nichols, that this matter be APPROVED. PASSED by the following vote. D Copy of a letter from Chief William Bryson, Director, Department of Fire-Rescue, notifying Octavio Solis, Fire Lieutenant, of the department's action to rescind the 24-hour suspension letter and hereby fine him for a 24-hour period, effective July 21, (NO APPEAL TO DATE) D Copy of a letter from Chief John F. Timoney, Director, Department of Police, notifying Debra Grant, Police Officer, of her 20-hour suspension, effective July 3, 2006 and copy of a request from Debra Grant requesting a hearing of appeal relative to her 20-hour suspension. A hearing has been scheduled for February 27, RECEIVED AND FILED City of Miami Page 3

5 D Copy of a letter from Chief John F. Timoney, Director, Department of Police, notifying Paul Jean, Police Officer, of his termination, effective July 1, 2006 and copy of a request from Paul Jean requesting a hearing of appeal relative to his termination. A hearing has been scheduled for January 16, RECEIVED AND FILED D Copy of a letter from Mario Soldevilla, Director, Department of Solid Waste, notifying James Thomas, Administrative Assistant II, of his 3-day suspension, effective July 10, 2006 and copy of a request from Ronald J. Cohen, Attorney, requesting a hearing of appeal on behalf of James Thomas, relative to his 3-day suspension. A hearing has been scheduled for January 16, RECEIVED AND FILED D Copy of a letter from Mario Soldevilla, Director, Department of Solid Waste, notifying Gerard Cineus, Waste Collector Operator II, of his 3-day suspension, effective July 10, 2006 and copy of a request from Gerard Cineus requesting a hearing of appeal relative to his 3-day suspension. A hearing has been scheduled for February 27, RECEIVED AND FILED D a Copy of a Memorandum from Joe Arriola, Chief Administrator/City Manager, concerning the grievance hearing of Kenneth McIIIwain. (NOTIFICATION) E. E.1 GENERAL ITEMS Copy of a memorandum from Elsa I. Jaramillo-Velez, Assistant City Attorney, advising that an agreement has been reached concerning Ryan Alexander, Building Inspector III, relative to his 3-day suspension. The suspension has been reduced to a reprimand only. The hearing has been removed from the Board's docket. (NOTIFICATION) E Copy of Findings of Fact concerning the appeal hearing of Anishka Anderson. Chairman de la O stated that he received a fax from the Executive Secretary yesterday which contained alternate Findings of Fact proposed by Attorney Cohen. He asked if Board Members and opposing counsel were issued a copy of the proposed Findings. Assistant City Attorney Jaramillo-Velez responded that she received a copy this morning. City of Miami Page 4

6 Chairman de la O stated that he read the proposed findings quickly, but if he caught the gist of Attorney Cohen's request, it was to add language concerning the comparison of Ms. Anderson to Ms. [another City employee Lavonne] Wilcox since his client, Anishka Anderson, committed the same infraction as Ms. Wilcox, and Ms. Wilcox served an 80-hour suspension as opposed to being terminated. Ronald J. Cohen, Attorney at Law on behalf of Aniska Anderson, appeared before the Board and responded that he wishes to have the Findings revised for the aforementioned reason and also because of the purpose behind Ms. Anderson's search. Chairman de la O asked the City's representative how she wished to proceed in this matter. Assistant City Attorney Jaramillo-Velez stated that the City is of the opinion that it is only the Board's Special Counsel who can prepare Findings. She went on to say that she is unable to find the Code at this time that pertains who has authority to prepare findings since she just received this document today. Chairman de la O asked Assistant City Attorney Jaramillo-Velez if Attorney Cohen has the right to make suggestions regarding changing the Findings of Fact. Assistant City Attorney Jaramillo-Velez stated that she would like to look for the language that is used in the Code with regards to who has authority to prepare the findings. Attorney Cohen apologized for submitting the document late and stated that he would not have a problem if the Board wished to postpone discussion of this item to allow the Assistant City Attorney time to review the document and locate the information in the Code. Assistant City Attorney Jaramillo-Velez stated that she had no problem with postponing this matter for discussion at the Board's next meeting. Without objection from other Board Members, the Chairman deferred this item to the Board's next meeting for discussion. DEFERRED F. F.1 REPORTS Copy of the Civil Service Board Monthly Report (June & July) to the City Commission. (DISCUSSION) PRESENTED F Notification of Pending Hearings as of. PRESENTED G. H. H.1 REQUESTS FOR HEARINGS TODAY'S HEARINGS Hearing of appeal on behalf of Charles Dawkins, Economic Analyst, relative City of Miami Page 5

7 to his 2-day suspension, effective October 14, The Board entered into the scheduled hearing of appeal on behalf of Charles Dawkins, Economic Analyst. Assistant City Attorney Jaramillo-Velez stated that she had a Motion to Dismiss for lack of jurisdiction that she wished to offer. Attorney Sheptow stated that he received the City's Motion approximately two minutes ago. Chairman de la O asked both attorneys if they wished to postpone the hearing in order to have an opportunity to prepare for the motion or if they wished to go forward. Attorney Sheptow asked if the Board could hold the hearing without considering the Motion since he only received it two minutes ago. Chairman de la O stated that he had not seen the Motion; therefore, he needs to see it so that he could better address the matter. He asked the attorneys to tell him what they preferred to happen with this case. Attorney Sheptow stated that his client's case has been pending for approximately one year; therefore, in a sense, it is inexcusable that he just received a copy of the Motion to Dismiss this morning. He went on to say that he is not prepared to argue the City's Motion today; therefore, if the hearing needs to be postponed that is what he would consider so that he could have an opportunity to review the Motion. Assistant City Attorney Jaramillo-Velez stated that this is the first time Mr. Dawkins' case was scheduled. Attorney Sheptow stated that he would ask that the continuance be charged to the City. Chairman de la O responded that he is in agreement with charging the continuance to the City. Assistant City Attorney Jaramillo-Velez responded that in the past the Board has taken up verbal and written Motions to Dismiss for which the City had no time to prepare to argue its position. Chairman de la O stated that he does not think it would be fair to consider the Motion today because the Board and opposing counsel need to review it. He went on to say that it is a fundamental issue as to whether or not the Board can proceed; therefore, he does not think it is fair to drop the Motion on opposing counsel the morning of the hearing and expect the employee's attorney to be ready to go forward. Assistant City Attorney Jaramillo-Velez stated that she does not think it is fair to charge the City with the continuance especially when everyone is present and a Motion to Dismiss is a very basic issue to consider. She went on to say that she spoke with Attorney Sheptow about the matter of his client's discipline being a contractual issue so this is not the first time he heard about the matter, but this morning was the first time that he received the written Motion to Dismiss. Attorney Sheptow stated that the fact that this is a contractual issue probably came up in his conversations with Assistant City Attorney Jaramillo-Velez, but never not once did she hint that she would be filing a Motion to Dismiss. City of Miami Page 6

8 Following discussion, the Board considered a motion to continue the appeal hearing of Mr. Charles Dawkins and charge the continuance to the City which resulted in the following vote: Motion by Member Nichols, seconded by, that this matter be CONTINUED. PASSED by the following vote. H Hearing of appeal on behalf of Marie Angrand, Crime Scene Investigator I, relative to her 8-hour forfeiture, effective July 8, The Board entered into the scheduled hearing of appeal on behalf of Marie Angrand, Crime Scene Investigator I. Elsa I. Jaramillo-Velez, Assistant City Attorney, represented the City of Miami Police Department. Brett Sheptow, Attorney at Law, represented the Appellant. Opening statements were made by both attorneys. Chairman de la O stated that for purposes of keeping the hearing streamlined, he needed to ask Attorney Sheptow a question based upon arguments he made in his opening statement. He asked Attorney Sheptow if he was saying that even if Ms. Angrand left the latent cards behind this would not be a violation of the Standard Operating Procedures (SOP). Attorney Sheptow responded in the affirmative. Chairman de la O asked Attorney Sheptow if he thought it would make a difference in determining whether or not his client violated the SOP based upon the length of time it took the department to search or not search for the latent cards. Attorney Sheptow responded that according to the SOP, this would not have been a violation. For clarification purposes, Chairman de la O asked if regardless of whether or not it was a violation to leave the latent cards behind when Ms. Angrand left that night, he would like to know if Attorney Shepow felt the length of the search itself, regardless of how long or short a time it took to find the latent cards would have made a difference as to whether there was a violation of the SOP. Attorney Sheptow responded that there was no language in the SOP that indicates that an employee would be in violation if a search went on for a certain length of time without the latent cards being found. Chairman de la O asked the City representative for her position on this matter. Assistant City Attorney Jaramillo-Velez stated that she thinks the length of time it took the department to look for the latent cards does matter and that the Board will hear testimony as to when the cards are to be submitted. Chairman de la O stated that he was asking if the Board needs to spend a lot of time on testimony concerning how long it took to find the cards because he already knows that City of Miami Page 7

9 the Appellant feels that the latent cards were very easy to find whereas the City indicated that it took hours to find the latent cards. He went on to say that he did not see the relevance of the length of time it took to find the latent cards, but if someone felt otherwise, this was fine. Chairman de la O further stated that if the Board does not have to spend time hearing testimony about how long it took the department to locate the latent cards, this case could be finished sooner. Assistant City Attorney Jaramillo-Velez stated that she thinks the length of time it took to find the cards is relevant. Chairman de la O asked Attorney Jaramillo-Velez to tell the Board why she thinks this issue is relevant. Assistant City Attorney Jaramillo-Velez responded that the issue is relevant because the latent cards were lost at one time and losing the cards is very important since these were latent cards for a homicide case. Attorney Sheptow stated that opposing counsel mentioned that the Board would hear testimony as to when the latent cards are to be turned in. He went on to say that the Board should forget about hearing testimony when the SOP clearly indicates when the latent cards should be turned in. The Rule of Witnesses was not invoked. All witnesses were sworn in individually. Witnesses for the City appeared in the following order: 1. Kenneth Pratt, Crime Scene Investigator I, City of Miami, Department of Police. Questions were posed by Board Members de la O, Cruz and Garcia during the testimony of Witness Kenneth Pratt. 2. Wendell Harris, Crime Scene Investigator II, City of Miami, Department of Police. Questions were posed by Board Members de la O and Dames during the testimony of Witness Wendell Harris. 3. Lazaro R. Fernandez, Crime Scene Supervisor, City of Miami, Department of Police. Questions were posed by Board Member Cruz during the testimony of Witness Lazaro Fernandez. 4. Hector Infante, Crime Scene Investigator II, City of Miami, Department of Police. Questions were posed by Board Member Dames during the testimony of Witness Hector Infante. The City of Miami Police Department rested its case. Marie Angrand, Crime Scene Investigator I, City of Miami, Department of Police, testified on her own behalf. Questions were posed by Board Members Dames and de la O during the testimony of Witness Marie Angrand. The Appellant rested her case. City of Miami Page 8

10 The City of Miami Police Department waived rebuttal. Following final argument by both attorneys, the Board considered a motion to find the Appellant NOT GUILTY of Charge #1 - Neglect to Duty. Under discussion, Chairman de la O stated that the Police Department normally overcharges its employees when issuing discipline, but he thinks this is the first time the Department undercharged the employee. He went on to say that it is clear to him that the SOP is poorly worded. Chairman de la O further stated that he thinks no one could have foreseen these circumstances and he thinks Attorney Sheptow is correct that the SOP should read, "at the end of the shift" as opposed to "at the end of the day". He stated that he thinks the department meant to write "shift", but it wrote "day" in the SOP. Chairman de la O went on to say that he thinks the punishment is fair, he thinks Ms. Angrand knows that she made a mistake because she admits it in her memorandum that this was not the way she was trained and this was not the way evidence should have been handled. He further stated that when he initially read the reprimand, he was not sure why Ms. Angrand was challenging the reprimand, but at the same time the SOP indicates "the same day" so he feels constrained to follow the SOP even though he thinks it results in an injustice to the City because he believes that Ms. Angrand violated the intent or certainly the spirit of the SOP. Chairman de la O stated that he is sure there are other Departmental Orders that cover the handling of evidence because other officers were charged with these violations. He went on to say that he is going to vote not guilty on all of the charges but he does not feel good about it. Following discussion, the motion on the floor resulted in the following vote: Motion by Member Cruz, seconded by Member Nichols, that this matter be APPROVED. PASSED by the following vote. The Board considered a motion to find the Appellant NOT GUILTY of Charge #2 - Latent Prints, which resulted in the following vote: Motion by Member Cruz, seconded by Member Garcia, to APPROVE. PASSED by the following vote. The Board considered a motion to find the Appellant NOT GUILTY of Charge #3 - Breach of Proper Discipline, which resulted in the following vote: Motion by Member Garcia, seconded by Member Cruz, to APPROVED. PASSED by the following vote. The Board considered a motion to find the Appellant NOT GUILTY of Charge #4 - Loss/Injury to the City, which resulted in the following vote: Motion by Member Garcia, seconded by Member Dames, to APPROVE. PASSED by the following vote. City of Miami Page 9

11 H Hearing of appeal on behalf of Teresa Borkowski, Police Sergeant, relative to her 10-hour suspension, effective April 4, The Board took no action on this case because a continuance was granted at today's meeting. CONTINUED ADJOURNMENT: The meeting adjourned at 1:32 P.M. Breaks were taken between 10:16-10:38 A.M. and 11:49 A.M -12:05 P.M. Motion by Member Garcia, seconded by Member Nichols, to APPROVE. PASSED by the following vote. SIGNATURE: Miguel M. de la O, Chairman ATTEST: Tishria L. Mindingall, Executive Secretary City of Miami Page 10