Laserfiche WebLink
STATEMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC ON AGENDA ITEMS <br />CHR. HAITSUKA: Next up, we have statements from the public on agenda items. Before <br />we start I would like to remind everyone that we have a three - minute rule per subject <br />according to our rules, and because we have a pretty full agenda today, we are going to <br />enforce that as best as we can. I'm going to ask every body to please limit your testimony <br />per item on the agenda to three minutes. First we have Mr. Michael Ben from the <br />Department of Human Resources. Good afternoon, Mr. Ben. <br />MICHAEL BEN <br />(At this time Michael Ben Department of Human Resources Director, came forward to address <br />members of the Charter Commission.) <br />MR. BEN: Good afternoon, Chairman Haitsuka and members. For the record, I am Michael <br />Ben, Director of Human Resources for the County. I wanted to comment - -you have my <br />written testimony - -on two agenda items: CA -24, Boards and Commissions and then move on <br />to CA -28, Civil Defense. With respect to CA -24, I just wanted to ask that the term, area <br />specific board, be given a more definitive definition, if there is such a phrase. One definition <br />of area specific is not necessarily geographical; it is activity or concept. So, technically, my <br />Merit Appeals board, which is a five member board, the area specific activity is to hear <br />appeals concerning civil service law. So, I think it fits that definition very easily, and I <br />would not like to have nine council members trying to nominate five positions for that board. <br />If the intent is something else, I would ask that you consider amending that particular <br />proposal. <br />With respect to the Civil Defense proposal, I want to preface my comments by saying that <br />what I'm about to comment on, you folks really need to have "legal beagles" check it out. It <br />is my interpretation of what I think the applicable laws are. I'll take the easy ones first. I <br />think the provisions need the term "necessary staff' and something along with other duties as <br />may be required. If you notice throughout all the Charter, there are provisions for that in <br />every single agency and what not. So, a standard of interpretation is that if you leave <br />something out, it was the intent to leave it out. In other words, you cannot have necessary <br />staff and the only duties you can perform are what is very specific. That is just a general rule <br />of interpretation, since you have it for everybody else. <br />The next point I wanted to discuss is the requirement for appointment by the Mayor. <br />Customarily and historically, it has always been the Mayor who has been doing the <br />appointment. But, technically, under the law, it is who is appointed as the Deputy Director of <br />Civil Defense; and it has been the Mayor usually, and therefore, the Mayor in turn has <br />appointed our Civil Defense Administrator. So, I wanted to point that out to you and make <br />appropriate amendments to the proposal to reflect the actual position that is doing the <br />appointment. One last comment on that, because you use the term, "appointment and <br />removal," when you have that terminology, you normally are speaking about an "at will" <br />employee. In other words, that person could be removed for whatever reason the appointing <br />authority may desire to remove the person. So, by law, that person is a civil service <br />employee, so civil service provisions apply to the removal of that position; also to <br />2 <br />