|
minutes 03-18-00Page 2 of 27
<br />doesn’t really lend itself to having actual experience. That’s one problem. The other problem is the use of the term ‘scientific
<br />methods in public administration’. Me, or my counterparts, have no idea what that qualification is. I, personally, don’t believe
<br />there’s a conflict between the qualification in the law and if the Charter was to contain more specific qualification. So, I
<br />would suggest that HR is no longer a paper-pushing agency. It encompasses a vast variety of skills, knowledges and abilities,
<br />and is, today, recognized as a profession, and I think the qualifications for the position should reflect that also.
<br />The third area I wanted to comment on was the part of the removal of the Fire Chief. My comments is not so much as to that
<br />issue, but to the issue of equity among other similarly situated positions. For positions that are appointed and removed by the
<br />Commission, which is what the Fire Chief proposal is about, it’s only for the Fire Chief that you provide that before
<br />termination, the motion for termination must provide reasons, and the Fire Chief must be given an opportunity to respond to
<br />the reasons before actual removal. And all I’m saying is we should treat similarly situated positions equally. First of all,
<br />we’re going to be left with that provision for ten years, but otherwise, you are emphasizing, once again, that the removal of
<br />the Fire Chief position is distinct and separate from the removal of other Commission appointed positions. In other words,
<br />there is a minimal due process involved with the Fire Chief, and because you have distinctly provided for that for the Fire
<br />Chief, there is no due process involved at all for the other similarly situated positions. And that’s all the comments I wanted
<br />to make. Thank you.
<br />RAY: I really appreciate that input. I’m the one most to blame for the qualifications requirements. That was, kind of, a mix or
<br />match, going through different Charters and just coming up with it.
<br />BEN: Well, understand the existing Charter already has different qualifications.
<br />RAY: Right, and the Charters I was looking at were all, kind of, jambalaya like that, as well. In other words, everything I was
<br />referring to also has those same inconsistencies in it. We’ll definitely take a look at that. And that was an input we got in
<br />terms of make-up of Boards and Commissions, is why can’t you make them all exactly the same, so we took a shot at that
<br />and we were equally unsuccessful in coming up with any consistency there. But, I appreciate that.
<br />And as part of my opening remarks, which I haven’t given yet, this is very much a work in progress and I hope it’s not
<br />premature to come out with all these proposed amendments, but we wanted to engage not only you folks, but the public
<br />sooner rather than later because nobody pays any attention until you actually put down proposed stuff on paper, and then all
<br />of a sudden everybody wakes up. So we wanted to go ahead and get stuff out even though a lot of it is still very much under
<br />discussion, and a lot of this stuff we haven’t even voted on. It’s just an indication of where it looks like it’s going. Well,
<br />thank you very much.
<br />Henry Ross, would you like to testify next?
<br />ROSS: Mr. Chairman, members of the Commission. I have two subjects that I want to very briefly handle unless you have
<br />questions. I’ll be as brief as possible. In the first place, Mr. Chairman, you opened this meeting. It was announced as a
<br />hearing. I would like to know what it is.
<br />RAY: It’s a public hearing.
<br />ROSS: Pardon? It is a hearing.
<br />RAY: Yes.
<br />ROSS: And not a meeting. Okay. Because the rules are different for hearings than for meetings. That’s why I’m asking. I
<br />want to tell you that I’m not here to, in any way, obstruct, or whatever, the workings of this Commission, but I think I have
<br />some contributions to make here from long-time experience that may be useful and there is still time to make changes that are
<br />required. Now, I would like to open with - Let me ask something else first. In your rules - you developed some rules
<br />somewhere along the line - shouldn’t there be a quorum here today?
<br />RAY: We discussed it and addressed it in an earlier meeting, and we actually took a vote to the effect that a quorum was not
<br />required -
<br />ROSS: Okay.
<br />RAY: For a public hearing.
<br />file://\\coh01\cohweb\council\charter_commission\minutes\minutes 03-18-00.html7/1/2011
<br />
<br />
|