Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem #13 - Discussion ItemWOLFSON, APPEL & MARAM, P. A. JEROME H,WOLFSON' CHARLES APPEL - BARRv S. HARAM , ANTHONY J, BROWN ROBERT D, SHAPIRO EDWARDI.GOLDEN Mr. Joseph Grassie City Manager City of Miami Dinner Key Miami, F1 33133 Attn: Selma Schwartz, Agenda Secretary. ,. ATTORNEYS AT LAW 1600 CORAL WAY MIAMI, FLORIDA 33145 Dear ,Mr.Grassie: Please consider. to be placed on the Meeting. TELEPHONE f,305) 956-2500 BROWARD 523-0933 this the appropriate and formal request agenda for the July 11, 1979 City Council I am requesting one-half hour to speak on the matter of Horner Lanier and the letter of June . 20, 1979.E from the Justice`.. Department. A copy of that letter is enclosed. JHW:mg Enclosure cc: er tru s, George Knox, Esquire City of Miami Attorney a2IVC eljJ4" kj/'tL eo4M►i v/° D4" 7• 2S' 7f 1 DSD:DLR:SQ:msp` DJ 170-18-31 142 0 i979 George F. Knox, Jr., Esquire Miami City Attorney 174 East Hagler Street Miami-, Florida 33131. Robert Krause, Director Department of Human Resources Post- office `Box-330708 - Miami,"Florida 33133 Re Sergeant Homer Lanier Dear Messrs. Knox and Krause: From my conversations with both of you and Mr. Wolfson, the court hearing on June 1, and the deposition of Chief Harms taken in this matter ,I"think most if not all relevant information relating to Sergeant Lanier have been made available. As I understand it, Sergeant Lanier was not promoted to Lieutenant, either out of rank order pursuant to the consent agreement or appropriate memorandum of understanding. Based on Sergeant Lanier not being promoted and informationfromthe above sources there are several concerr. and questions which we have related to this matter, and which we would hope could be resolved and result in the promotion of what appears tobe a well qualified minority officer. First would ,be the filling of the promotion coals in the up level officer ranks as set forth in pargraph.5(b).:Obviously an opportunity was missed, since even the Chief Harm's testimony in the -:position was that he thought Sergeant Lanier was well qualified. Reading the deposition of the chief I am puzzled and concerned as to the use of background checks on minorities and his understanding of several parts of the decree --officers in the promotion process and the term "demonstrably better qualified". Sinceit is my understanding that one of the factors involved in Sergeant Lanier's case was a background Problem. If that is true we have a serious problem with the selection process since the consent decree paragraph 3, goes to great lengths to ensure that selection procedures for minoritiesand females are the same as those for white Anglo males. The chief ifhe did consider background information on Sergeant Larier and did not on the other officers promoted (in the deposition he says he did not) would clearly be using a different standard for minorities and a violation of the decree. Finally, in light of the work records of several of the persons promoted, I am puzzled as to how Chief Harms viewed their qualifications and; promotion potential. It would seem that our support of the City's efforts to ensure that qualified persons are promoted and allowing the City some latitude in not promoting in rank order off the registers was rot used in this instance when a perfect opportunity; was made available. While not wanting to interfere with the discretion of the Police Chief in the selection process, we feel compelled to respond to what we view as possible violations of the decree; and the resultant failure to promote a well , qualified " minority officer, to an upper level, since" the opportunities are so few. %e would hope that the City wouldseek torectify this situation and provide us with a,response to the' questions and concerns we raised. r if either of you have questions or As always, concerns I would be happy to respond. Sincerely DREW S. DAYS I I I Assistant Attorney General Civil Rights Division SQUIRE PP.DGETT Attorney :` Federal Enforcement Section :::ITY OF MIAMI. 1NTE_R-OFFICE ;•AESr1ORANDUM Toy Hon. Mayor and Members of the City Commission Joseph R. Grassie FFtOM` City Manager I am attaching for your information a memo from the City Attorney explaining; thehearing, held by Judge Eaton on June 1, 1979 concerning the pending Civil Service Rules. You will note that Mr. Knox, in his concluding paragraphs states that "there is no legal impedimentto the adoption of the proposed Civil Service Rules and Regulations." In essence, the Court hastakenthe position that the City Commission has the authority to adopt the pending Ordinance. This matter will be scheduled for your regular agenda on July 11. The Commission may also wish to consider whether it desires to set aside an additional day for a line -by-line review of the Ordinance. 7a 7,7 V- 7f CITY OF MIAMI, r."."..r210 ttiy7,5.#R•OFTIC = tY9�M RANC�U1vt. . TO: Joseph R. Grassie City Manager FMOMs Geo Cit I have your memorindum OATS: June 11, 1979 F�lE7 r ;,lriJIc,T: USA v. Cityof Miami and. FOB At the `most recent "hearing which :was conducted in the. Chambers of Federal Judge Joe"Eaton"on June`1,' 1979, the International" Association of Fire :Fighters ;was `permitted to intervene. as, parties_ defendant"in the Decree"".case.._""The Fire" Fighte�r`s,..,b_y.virtue::of their -intervention, became signatories the Consent'".Decree and bundby." its terms:. The;Judge"-Beard '- arguments -,as _to'"whether"_or "not the F,e F�ighens, o=r the Court., had the power t�o pass up.,on.the propos,ed.�vi.l Service Rules and Regulations. " The Judge..reaffi"rmed'."his position that the Federal, -Court would not endeavor "to attend to the =.business"`_of the City of .Miami_. �He f_urther i-ndicated.that "if the prop"rieby of the%.proposed Civil Service Rules:.and"R'egula"tions was t"o b,e. judicially:. det,e,:rmined, any competent 'tribunal;would be "available"` to any':,,iierson or entity'who'wo,uld chose to attack, the proposed rules.: ' In `any event, Judge "Eaton emphatically noted that until there :were;=rules- in existence, thereprobably no legitimate legal•case or controversy. • Based ;upon my review of '"the pro"ceedi"ngs, I can reiterate my suggestion 'tha.t there is, no legal" impediment", tothe adoption of the proposed Civil Service Rules'` and Regulations., GFK/ rb; cc: Robert D.'Krause, Director Human Resources Joseph R. Grassie City Manager ei •e F. Knox Ci Attorne • t • lv li�1"TAR-O�r�C Y MEMORANJOU:"+i April 27, 1979 Il.e Commission Meeting on Civil Service Amendments ViN4"i..USURiS• • I have read Mr. Krause's memo to you regarding the above captioned matter, which was dated April 26, 1979, and`I concur in his sugges- tion that the Civil Service amendments be presented to the City Commission on May 24th. I am advised that there has been some suggestion that the adoption of the proposed amendments by the City "Commission would be untimely in light of our recent arguments at the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals " regarding the legal status =; of ' our Consent Decree, which is the primary precipitator for the proposed rule changes. I can .advise you unequivocally that there exists no legal impedi- ment .norcourt order which would preclude theadoption•. of the amendments to the Civil Service Rules at the May 24th meeting. GFK/bbb CC: John P. Bond, III Assistant City Manager Squire Padgett, Esquire U. S. Department of Justice Robert D. Krause', Director Department of Human Resources L. Joseph R. Grassie City. Manager Robert D. Krause, Director. Department of Human Resources r.: April 26, 1979 Commission Meeting on Civil Service Amendments 4 FERENC _s: Mr. Bond has informed me that the Commission: meeting previously :scheduled for May 10- We had planned to include the proposed Civil Service amendments. on the agenda for that meeting and had invited Attorney Squire. Padgett of the United States Justice Department to be present in order to answer questions and provide additional information that may be desirable by rnembers of the City Commission. I`have discussed this matter by telephone with Mr. Padgett and have informed him that itis my understanding the Commission will be meeting both on Tuesday,May 22 and Thursday, May 24.,a Mr* Padgett has indicated that he is available to meet with the City Commission on Thursday, May 24. He has also indicated that he would plan to stay over on Friday of thatweek in order to discuss further your response of April 6 to hisletter ofJanuary :29concerning the Con- sent Decree. I have also been informed by members of the staff of the Dade County Community RelationsBoard that members of the Board will wish to speak at the meeting of May 24. Additionally, members of the City's own Affirmative Action Advisory Board has also in- dicated that they would like to be present to discuss the proposed rules on May 24. I am therefore requesting that the proposed ordinance amending the Civil Service, rules, which is now pending before the City Commission, be included ,on- the;tgenda for action at 2:00 Q.P.M. on Thursday, May:*24, ,1979.7'=LIt µmay also be desirable to advise .members of . the Commission sufficiently in advance so that they will be aware of the plans that other persons have made to participate in the Commission meeting. has rescheduled its r t Joseph R. Grassie City Manager April 26, 1979 Page 2 _ Mr. Padgett has asked me to confirm these arrangement by letter. In order that he may schedule his own calendar, I am sending a tentative letter concurrent with this memo. If there is any change in the ComniissiOfl schedule, please let me know so that I may inform Mr. Padgett. RDK:jb CC: John P. Bond, `III Assistant City Manager George F. Knox, Jr. City Attorney Squire Padgett, Esquire U.S Department; of Justice • 1 r Mr. Joseph R. Grassie City Manager City of Miami P.O. Box 330708 Miami, Florida 33133 Dear Mr. Grassie: May 16, 1979. 12 The Affirmative Action Advisory Board of the City of Miami has previously voted to request an appearance before the City Com- mission in connection with the pending ordinance that would amend the Civil Service Rules. In view of the fact that the ordinance amending the Civil Ser- vice Rules will appear on the agenda for the Commission meeting of May 24, I would appreciate it if you would schedule an appearance for me in connection,, with the ordinance, along with other members of the Affirmative Action Advisory Board who may wish to attend. Very truly yours, Rev. H. W. Kirtley • Chairperson. Affirmative Action Advisory Board 4 id'> I E ` C LO i biz+ l#I +: A D 6+.wr ilia/ tk! .J f �3 COMMUNITY RELATIONS BOARD REV, IRVIN ELLIGAN, JR. Chairperson EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE Judge Mario P. Goderich Vice Chairperson Kenrick D. Clifford Vice Chairperson Rolando A. Amador Mrs. Alicia S. Baro James Chambers Mrs. Sophia Englander Joseph Murphy Ms. Francena Thomas THE BOARD Mrs. Joy V. W. Alschuler Rabbi Herbert M. Baumgard Margaret A. Benton Eve Brennan Paul Brookshire Melvin "Skip" Chaves Mrs. Helene Dubbin Jose Feito John J. Gibson Joel Hirschhorn Dr. Antonio Jorge Ms. Annie L. Love Allan B. Margolis Robert H. McCabe William Moses Dr. Eduardo J. Padron Garth C. Reeves, Jr. Sandy, Rubinstein Msgr. Bryan O. Walsh Rev. Conrad R. Willard PAST CHAIRPERSON— EX OFFICIO Albert W. Dilthcy Immediate fast Chairperson Richard A. Pettigrew George Cooper, Jr. Alfredo G. Duran Mrs. Charles H. Finkelstein Joseph Robbie Edwin S. Shirley Jr., M.D. Jay Janis Henry King Stanford' Harry P. Cain Rabbi Joseph R. Narot Bishop James L. Duncan Archbishop Coleman F. Carroll May 15, 1979 The '`Honorable; Joseph . R. Grassie`` City Manager, City of Miami Pan American Drive Miami, Florida 33133 Attention: Mrs Thelma Schwartz Agenda Clerk Dear Mr. Grassie. ROBERT It SIMMS. Executive Director Pursuant to our telephone conversation with Mrs. Schwartz, in relation to the City Commission, the_following members of meeting on"May 24,-� 1979, the Dade County Community Relations Board desire to be placed on the Commission's; agenda to speak on the item regarding proposed revisions to the Civil. Service rules. They ace as follows: Rev. Irving Elligan, Jr.; Attorney Joseph Murphy; Francena Thomas and Attorney Rolando Amador. Also desiring to be placed on the Agenda to. speak on the same item is Dr.Eduardo,J. Padron, who will be speaking as . President` of S.A.L.A.D., which is the Spanish American League Against .Dis crimination. Also desiring to be placed on the 2501 S.W. 22ND STREET (CORAL WAY) • MIAMI. FLORIDA 33141 TEL: $711-5730 1979- Agenda to speak on the same item will' be. Mr. Ted. Nichols, Chairman of the Florida Advisory.Committee to the United States Commission on Civil Rights. Aristides Sosa Assistant Director JD:`ja cc: J. Bond, Asst. City Mgr. Eduardo J. Padron Ted Nichols' lf. PFICM: tl'aiFil';•\ .', tC °t.:�,ti.l llr..';•'! July:7, proposed Ordinance Amending Civil Service Rules 4 v 1 Joseph R. , Grassie City Manager Robert D. Krause. Executive Secretary Civil Service Board You are hereby advised that a series of amendments to the Civil Service Rules have been adopted by;,the Civil Service Board. The amendments were based principally upon suggestions made by the U.S. Department - Justice. The amendmentswere originally submitted to the Civil Service Board by the Executive. Secretary at a special Board meeting on June 6, 1978. Accompanying the amendments was a memorandum dated June 1, 1978 submitted by the Executive Secretary and sum- marizing the amendments. A copy of that memorandum is attached for your information. At its, meeting of June 6, 1973 the Civil Service Board scheduled these amendments; for further consideration, at its meeting of June 13. At the regular Civil Service Board meeting. of June 13, the Board scheduled a public hearing to be held on July "6,. 1978 concerning these amendments. As a result of the public hearing, the Board voted three to two to approve the proposed amendments. I have submitted the amendments to the Law Department with a re- quest that an appropriate ordinance be drafted to incorporate the amendments approved by the Board at the meeting of July 6. The proposed ordinance is hereby submitted for transmission to the City ComrnissiOfl at its meeting of July 13, 1978 The attached memorandum of June 1, 1978 from the Executive Secretary to the Civil Service Board summarizes the effect of the changes incorporated in the proposed amendments. The attached ordinance prepared by the Law Department is intended to repeal Ordinance 6945, as'amended,in its entirety and substitute a new ordinance approving a new code of Civil Service Rules? and Regulations in accord with the amendrnents approved by the Civil Service Board. I s . • irq PLEASE POST 1 CIVIL SERVICE INFORMATION BULLETIN NO. 114 JUNE 14, 1978. TO: All Department Directors, Division Heads and Employees FROM: Robert D. Krause Executive Secretary Civil Service Board PLEASE POST DATE: June 14,'1978 SUBJECT: Proposed Amendments to Civil Service Rules A public hearingconcerning proposed amendments to the City of Miami Civil Service Rules and Regulations (Ordinance No. 6945), is scheduled for Thursday, July 6, 1978, before the Civil Service ' Board. The hearing will be conducted at a special meeting of the Board in the City Commission Room, City Hall, 3500 Pan American Drive, Dinner Key, at 9:00 A.M. The proposed amendments, accompanied by a memorandum of June 1 from the Executive Secretary are being sent to all departments. By copy of this memo, I am requesting all department directors to post copies of the June 1 memo and the proposed amendments in appropriate places where they will be available to all employees. The enclosed memo of June 1, 1978 summarizes the proposed amendments as they relate to suggestions made to the City of Miami by the United States Department of Justice. The proposed amendments contain the full text of all changes that have been proposed. C "1 re of t-Lt DA li`i 1i' f!.0FrIC _ NI FM0nANDUM Th.! Civil Service Board ltobert 1) Kruse Executive; Secretary Civil Service Board June 1, 1978,. Submitted, with this memo are proposed amendments "to the City's Civil .Servicp Rules. ice` These proposals; result from an exchange of correspondence between the Justice Depart- ment and the Mayor. The revisions were drafted in conjunction with the Law Department. Pursuant to a discussion with Chairman Silverman,I am sugesting that these proposals be received'at the Civil Service' Board. meeting of'June 6 andbe scheduled for public hearing on June 27. The proposed amendments do not affect the appellate functions orthe rule -making functions of the Board. Those functions remain intact in Rules 14,'16 and 18. In ad- dition,'exparded functions of the Board are specified in Rules 4-and 17. Rule 4, Policy Functions, is:intended to amplify the role of the Board in formulating personnel policy for the City government, consistent with the Model Law recommended by the National Civil Service League. Rule 17, Prohibited Practices, 1s intended to fill a long-standing void in the Civil Service Rules, giving the Board the authority to investigate allegations of fraud and to impose appropriate sanctions. Many of the routine administrative functions of the Board would be delegated to the Department of Human Resources. This would meet the suggestions of the Justice Depart- ment that responsibility for compliance with the Consent Decree and with Federal laws and regulations be vested in the City's professional staff. Nevertheless, the proposed Rules preserve for the Board those administrative decisions that affect the integrity of the merit system. These include, for example, the authority of the Board to by-pass names on open and promotional registers (Rules 8.3 and 3.4); approve appointments that may be outside, of normal, routine procedures (Rule 8.8); extend probationary periods (Rule 9.6); approve transfers to other classifications under specified conditions (Rule 11.1);'approve job assignments that are beyond the routine scope of Rules (Rule 11.2) make decisions on unsatisfactory service ratings (Rule 13); and authorize return from military leave beyond the normal 90-day period (Rule 15). Other changes in the proposed rules include the following: 1. A,definition of the unclassified service to clarify current ambiguities in• the appointment. of City Commission staff, other unclassified personnel, and especially CETA employees. It' is the intent of Rules 1.2 and 1.3 to include CETA employees, to the extent feasible, in the classified service. This should minimize administrative and morale problems by using the same selection methods and the same job standards both for CETA employees and for other classified personnel. This would also facilitate com- pliance with Fedaral.regulations by providing opportunities for CBTA workers to be "transitioned''into unsubsidized employment. When equivalent selection procedures are impracticable, the CETA jobs would remain unclassified. 4' T. Tha Civitt Service Board Page 2 June 1, 1978 4 2. .1 4..l.ariticition of the role and functions of the Chief Examiner. Rule 2.3 prov i..les`that the Chief Examiner will assure that examinations are provided, eligible lints are established, and .apppintments`are made in accord with Rules Of the Board. Basically, this confirms the role of the, Chief Examiner as it has traditionally functinntd in Miami. Rule ..4,also clarifies the role of the Chief Examiner in the review and resolution of complaints. 3. Elimination of the current Rule 4 on classification. Job classification is not a Charter function of the Board, and the Board's role in this process has never been more than advisory to the City Manager. Deletion of the Rule will remove.a source of confusion. It will also helpassure compliance with the Justice Department sug- gestion that the. determination of job requirements, as now described in class specifi- cations, be dele;.Aated to the professional staff. 4. Assignment of responsibility for job announcements, examination3 and eligible registers to the Department of Human Resources. Rule 5 is intended to comply with the Justice Department suggestion that minimum requirements be set by professional staff in accord with Federal requirements. Similarly, Rule 6 is intended to meet the require- ments of the Consent Decree and the suggestion of the Justice Department that City s?lection procciure....be validated in accord with Federal guitelines. In addition, this Rule reflects the policy established by the City Commission assigning test validation 'cunctions to the Department of Human Resources. Rule 7 essentially reflects current practice and assures consistency with the provisions of Rules 5 and 6. 5. Revision of the certification procedures to meet the suggestion of the Justice Department, which has concluded that present procedures impact adversely on women and minorities. Several models were considered and rejected in favor of less extreme re- vision3. Jacksonville, Florida has recently adopted a procedure of "random certi- fication" --regardless of test score --at the urging of the Office of Revenue Sharing. Many other cities have adopted a procedure of certifying all eligibles on each register, as recommended by the National Civil Service League. Both of these alternatives were rejected on the grounds that they do not place sufficient emphasis on the need for well -qualified employees in City jobs. A procedure for "selective certification" as used by many public agencies was also rejected on the grounds that it does not provide an opportunity for top candidates to be considered. A three-part procedure was therefore developed in Rule 8: c ) Certify the top 5 candidates on each list, in accord with the current trend toward "expanded certification," as reflected most recently in the Federal Personnel Management Project. The Federal report proposes a "Rule of 7" in place of the traditional "Rule of 3." Certify 3 additional names of minorities or women when this will.', help to meet the requirements of the Consent Decree or other Federal requirements. This follows the lead of such traditional"` Civil ce agen Servicies as the State of Washington and the City of Milwaukee, Wisconsin, which established its Civil Service system. in i895. To: The Civil Service Board Page 3 (3) Certify not more than 3 names of candidates who meet special 'qualification requirements. -This amends the long-standing., concept of'"selective certification," as used in most`Civil Service agencies , because it permits simultaneous consideration of the top names --rather than by-passing candidates at the head of the register, which is the more traditional practice. n many cases under the proposed Rules, only the top 5 candidates would be certified. When a department is falling short of its goals, or when special requirements are present, additional names may be referred. In any case, the appointing officer would always be working with the best available candidates --not with candidates referred from the bottom of a register nor from a random list determined by a computer. The new Rule 8 also amends the procedure for certifying from non- competitive and labor registers. Instead of referring the entire list, certification may be limited to those who are most qualified. This procedure should strengthen the merit principle and assure that top candidates have List apportunity fur employment consideration. Miami's present Rules have the effect of setting rigid appointment pro- cedures for such jobs as police, fire and clerical work --while providing no limitations on the appointment authority for professional, supervisory and labor jobs. The new Rule 8 should have the effect of providing more flexibility in the merit system and more emphasis on merit in the Civil Service system. A variety of other less significant changes are intended to assure internal consistency and to meet the suggestions of the Justice Department. The basic thrust of these re- visions is to balance several legitimate interests: (1) the interest of the Justice Department in assuring that the City fulfills its obligations under the Consent Decree; (2) the mandate of the City Commission to develop a more effective affirmative action program and to assure continuity of Federal grant funding; (3) the desire of City em- ployees to maintain a sound merit system; (4) the public interest in responsive, ef- fective government; and (5) the legal necessity to assure compliance with the Charter obligations of the Civil Service Board. It is intended that the proposed Rules preserve and enhance the Charter responsibilities of the Board in making Civil Service Rules, in hearing employee appeals, in establish- ing personnel policy, and in protecting the integrity of the Civil Service program. Copies of this memo are being sent to the Mayor, Members of the City Commission, the City Manager and the City Attorney. This is intended to assure that key elected and appointed officials will have an opportunity to study the policy issues involved in thm pvnpnq@d amencim@nto =end to MOP AnV 4113pAWAnI F11l:$ 1>31Y 4APM ApprSilf11 13E A=t: t U1@! tio@tittiold @f @ M440, 00044 11m1v4.e@ Al 114E'i4 MwohdttiA tit@ OtIY Ommtfi$4H11 City tlin4g@f" t1@@aPh i1, 4411n4$ tatty Aftornoy ti@or'ij4 h, Shim, 4: