We have a quorum.

Do we have a motion to come out of the executive session?

So moved.

You have a second.

All right, we're now out of executive session.

Okay.

Um is Mr.

Griffin present.

He is not.

Okay, well, we're we will proceed.

All right.

I spoke to Mr.

Griffin um briefly prior to the beginning of the morning session, and he wanted to request a continuance regarding the fact that he didn't have an have an attorney present.

However, we haven't um the appointment authority hasn't received any confirmation that he that he had an attorney.

And that was this morning.

That was this morning.

And we don't have any confirmation of an attorney either.

Um does counsel do you object to uh allowing him a continuance?

Or what is your position?

Um I I don't object, but um what whatever the commission wants to grant.

Okay.

And you were representing their pointing authority, correct?

Correct.

And you guys don't object to it.

Uh we don't update this.

Okay.

Well, let's see if the commissioners have a motion as regarding to allowing a continuance.

Um given the circumstances, he didn't really have a right of appeal.

Um, and he's not shown up when he was supposed to, so I'll be declined to approve it in continuance.

Okay.

I would not be inclined to do that.

Okay, so and so I would put a motion to uh grant the motion for some reason.

Okay.

So we have a motion to grant the summary disposition and deny a continuance from Commissioner Korn.

Do we have a second?

Okay, we have a second.

And and let me just I the motion is on the floor.

Let me just give context at Commissioner Korn.

It's because he's also a probationary period.

Right.

Right.

Uh probationary employee, which right of appeal, you know, under the commission rules, is only limited to certain uh criteria, which I don't think he has presented any criteria.

Okay.

So we have a motion uh on the floor to grant the umsd.

We have a second.

All in favor, please say aye.

Aye aye.

Any um objections or abstentions?

Hearing none, motion carries.

All right, okay.

Thank you, Commissioner.

You're welcome.

Okay, that concludes the docket for today.

We'll move to the business agenda.

Commissioners, uh, we'll ask if you would kindly take item number five out of order uh in respect for the time of both the police chief and the employees who are here on that matter.

Okay.

Um so item number five is a request from the police department to transfer the grounds, transportation, parking, and towing units from public works to the police department in accordance with rule three, section eight, transfer of a functional unit.

Okay.

Before um the police department makes their presentation.

I just wanted to remind the commission that the question before the commission is whether um, it's um I think it's rule four.

Rule three section.

Rule three, section eight point one says the civil service commission will review and consider the proposed transfer to determine its effect on the classified part.

So that's rule three.

Give me that rule again.

8.13.

Okay.

It's on the screen.

Okay.

Okay.

It's on the screen.

Okay.

Okay.

Looks like 33.

Page 32.

Page 33.

Yeah, table of contents is 33.

Okay.

Okay.

All right, well, good morning.

Well, good afternoon.

I've been saying good morning all day.

It must be a happy morning.

That's quite all right.

Uh, commissioners, I'm Ann Kirkpatrick, and thank you so much for giving me the privilege to address you.

Before we begin, I noticed even when I sat down, I want to remind y'all uh, if you did not know, I'm hearing impaired.

And so this is a very difficult room for me.

And so I don't always pick up every word.

So if you ask me something and I don't hear you, I might turn to the executive director and have her tell me what you have said.

So if you wouldn't mind being mindful of that issue, I just raised my hearing aids about as high as I can get them, but it's always not a matter of uh volume for me, it's distinction of words.

And so I just thought I would let you know.

Absolutely.

So thank you for indulging me on that.

One thing I'm not as vain.

So all right.

So if I may, uh again, commissioners, thank you for allowing me the opportunity to follow up on our request that you may have remembered back in uh in the middle of the year 2025, or at least in the fall, uh, when I came to you and told you of our interest and having the parking and towing and the ground transportation bureau to come over to the New Orleans Police Department.

Um, as you probably also know, I am the one who put a pause on that.

And so, and when the our new mayor and our city council uh met later in the fall, they were very clear that that is a direction that they would like for us to move toward understanding as your decision, and so that's why I'm back at the table, and I have been someone who wanted to have uh these units transferred from the public works department to the police department for for the efficiency of work.

Um right now, uh parking and ground transportation and the work that these men and women do is really very essential.

I mean, they are a critical part of how our city functions and operates.

However, going through the Department of Public Works to do the coordination actually kind of slows things down when it comes to just the efficiency, particularly doing special events, not to anyone's fault, it's just a functionality.

So by bringing them under our umbrella, uh, it just allows for a little cleaner uh, I think people want leadership that is clear and the mission is clear, and it just allows um that function.

And so that's why I'm back before you today.

We do have um well over about a hundred special events a year.

One thing about New Orleans is y'all like to celebrate, and I like that about New Orleans, but it's a very time consuming uh structure of uh just the logistics.

And so we also um if you were to approve this transfer, it would affect 74 employees who are right now in parking and towing, as well as 18 employees who would be transferring underground transportation.

So they would continue with the parking responsibilities or parking team parking parking enforcement is the word I'm trying to get to.

They would uh a critical function would be the towing issue, and then also they would continue with the oversight of the regulation of like cabs and things like that, which is a big part of the ground transportation work.

Their job function really doesn't change, it would just be the oversight of that.

If you end up approving it operationally, the units would go under our traffic division as it exists today.

Captain Buddy Mishou would be the captain over the unit.

We've talked a little bit about it, probably would need a lieutenant to also support that because that's about a hundred people coming out.

That's a big gosh, there are a lot of police departments in the country that don't have a hundred employees, so it's a big move.

And that's really the ask, and so I'm ready to take your questions.

That's okay.

If I I probably won't hear you, Commissioner.

Okay, but then I no, no worries.

So just I wanted to repeat just the last couple of sentences you said um about this captain.

Those are our motorcycle officers or fatality unit.

And that captain is Buddy Mishou.

Captain Mishu also has the responsibility for oversight of special events.

He's the one who coordinates like your second lines, he coordinates uh obviously Marty Gras.

I mean, so it would be a natural function for parking ground transportation to all foul under his leadership.

And he's been a um with us about 28 to 30 years, very seasoned.

And what was the total number of employees that he currently has?

So the package, if you will, would be what's the math here, 92, 92.

Right, but how many does he have now?

I think the question was how many.

Oh, I'm sorry, how many are in the division of the traffic unit?

About 25, yes.

25?

Yes.

But in some sense, you're saying that um he has to he's the one that has to coordinate with public works for these functions.

So in some sense, it may make it easier if he has direct control of the absolutely.

So for instance, we have uh even under the city, I believe we have seven tow trucks.

Um towing is a big issue for us when it comes to the special events, and so I mean, we actually need more tow trucks.

Um, but uh no, what is it?

We have nine tow trucks and seven operators, or something like that.

We don't have enough operators, but the actual on the spot decision making, we don't have to go through another department head to kind of get that, not that they haven't done a great job, they've been wonderful partners.

It's just actually just a little bit more efficiency.

So there are nine tow trucks and seven operators, that's what I was told, yes, ma'am.

Is that what's going on?

So is there let me let me rephrase this question?

How would you describe the efficiency of those seven operators?

You know, I uh I think the way to say is that there's a sometimes a time delay simply when you have to go through another city department head to say is it it's a simple issue of instead of my captain being able to get on the radio and saying, hey, I need a tow truck here, we've got to go over here and go and work a chain of command over here just to have a simple uh move.

So that's I know it sounds maybe kind of petty, but actually it's not when you're in real time and you need to move things very quickly.

That's why there's an efficiency actually in this simple chain of command.

Can I can I try to answer your question from personal experience?

I I'm sorry if I'm not hitting your the call of your question.

Well, I was gonna piggyback off of your notion about efficiency.

I'm one of these people that's frequently requesting the service as a fire captain, and the efficiency and the routing that these uh requests go through is circuitous and cumbersome.

It does create delays.

And having nine trucks doesn't mean there's nine on the streets.

Yep.

That's just the inventory of trucks.

That is not what is necessarily on the road at any given moment.

Yeah.

So in the world of uh public safety, like the fire side of the house and the police side of the house, we work a chain of command.

So things go up a chain and then they come down, and that can actually be quite time consuming to go up a chain, now I gotta go here, now I gotta go down the chain and go back up.

Absolutely.

And that is actually a time delay for us.

That's a time delay for us as well.

And and so I I think with the hopes I do see a crowd of people here is the communication and clarity of what's the next step.

And so what I'm hearing you say is that this process is for efficiency, hopefully, less disruptive disruption.

Yes, ma'am.

Now, our intent would of course be to keep people structurally the same.

They already have supervisors and things like that.

I'm not looking to disrupt.

I will have to say that so that you will do no.

We will have to actually fingerprint everybody.

They will have to have a certain level of background check, is what we call a triple I.

There are certain uh, for instance, if someone has a felony conviction, I would not be able to bring them over.

Okay, um, because they will have access to our criminal justice databases, and that would be an issue.

So, you know, we just want to kind of have an understanding that it's not everybody will have to be checked in that capacity.

Okay.

And credible service or years of service, the pension that benefits do not change, correct?

No, ma'am, that's gonna stay the same.

We're not here to disrupt.

Um I know it's kind of I know it's kind of um not everybody wants to move, and I get that, and I respect that actually.

I really do.

And I've been in agencies where we had the parking enforcement, we had this under my under my purview, and I've been in agencies where it's just like it is today.

So I understand both sides of the house.

I think I'm a good boss.

I think I I would treat people well and with respect and value, and I I would expect that of them, but I also am one who does have expectations.

And and I was gonna ask for you to piggyback uh of the why, like why the adult culture coming over to police and public safety in that sense.

What are the benefits of that?

Well, it is.

I mean, you actually um instead of saying that you were for city and the department of public works, I think it's kind of cool to say I'm a police employee.

I mean, I think it's cool.

But I mean I think that's kind of a positive, but you know, I understand.

We're gonna be respectful when so I let me just say to everybody if you approve this, we're gonna make this transition, um, one in which I hope that they will be pleased to be joining us.

I will show respect and honor to uh concerns and address that.

Um, but yes, there would be uh it's a new culture.

It is a it's not one and the same culture.

I have to just tell you that.

Chief, can you remind us why you put a pause on this initially?

Because I didn't think it I understood the majority didn't didn't want to come.

Okay, and you know, actually uh I wasn't looking for a hostile takeover.

Right.

And I understand that, but I also understand, you know, I'm a woman who tries to see different ways people think about things and argue things.

I didn't want a hostile takeover.

Um but I also agree that it may not matter if people like certain things when it is in the efficiency in the running of the city.

And the city does recognize that it would be way more functional and managed better if we had the team of people.

And I so that's why I'm back, and it is I think we can work through things like I said.

I I would want them to want to come, but at the same time, I respect that.

And they'll have to make the decision.

If you were to say, Chief, yes, we're gonna move in that direction, then it's kind of back on their plate.

If they really didn't want to come, that's okay.

There are other opportunities in the city, I would assume, but I would hope everyone would want to come.

Just two points quickly.

Uh back to Senator Corn's question about the defer.

I think one thing that I just remember asking was in terms of deferment, is there a written plan?

Is there a plan that would be shared with the commission?

I know you've answered a lot today in terms of what you want to do.

It's almost like I feel like I'm writing down your plan.

Is there anything formal in writing that can be digested?

Yes, go ahead and I'm gonna have Chief Landry speak to that.

Okay, so um I recently met with a former director of um DPW to obtain their SOPs, which is their standard uh operations procedure for both ground transportation and towing and uh towing and parking, and we're gonna develop our operational plan based on what they're accustomed to doing, and we have to we have to introduce it with what what is done in our strategic plan at NLPD.

So that's in the process.

But is it something you can share with the commission?

We have not started developing that.

We just we that's fine.

We we had initial meetings with the former director what last week and this week.

Thank you.

Okay.

And then the second um, I just want to revisit a topic from our the chair.

Well, actually, something you said, Chief.

Um, what would happen to the employees that you can't bring over?

Because you talked about the employees getting it might be something that the director might can better address than me because I'm not real sure what the operationally how that would look.

So I I think we'd have to work something out to where you would not want to terminate anybody because they couldn't pass the police background check.

So would it be do you leave a unit of people behind until through attrition that's gone, or do you find a different function form where they don't lose any pay?

So we would we would ensure that that employees, if anybody were unable to pass a police background, that we would work to either keep them in a in a unit within their existing department or find something else from the city government.

Just want to make sure everybody can hear what the personnel director said.

We're gonna give you guys opportunity to speak, because I do want to hear from the group for the individuals that it is going to impact.

Sure.

Yeah, we would not want that to negatively.

We would ensure that it would not negatively impact any existing.

Okay.

And if I may qualify for you, that's there's a distinction between a felony and a misdemeanor.

And not every misdemeanor excludes a person, a felon, a felony does.

But misdemeanors would be on a case by case uh situation, and we do have a governance uh about what is an acceptable uh misdemeanor and what's not.

And so uh so it's I just want everybody to know misdemeanors, mismeasures don't keep you from applying to be a police officer.

So, you know, we recognize people have uh mistakes of the past, and yet it's it's also governed by the state on access to databases.

That's what we call the criminal justice databases.

Okay, great.

So we do have some cards.

One speaker, okay.

Uh Aaron Mischler in support, uh, and he's representing the world's firefighters.

Okay.

Can I ask a question quick?

Amy, what um sorry, Mr.

Waiting.

No, go ahead.

How many vacancies are there in tow truck driver classification right now?

I don't know because of the hiring freeze.

I don't know.

Right.

We talked about it a while back, and there were some.

It's not fully staffed, so I'm just wondering if that's something that through time, perhaps if this move happens or not, can there be can this commission um give uh give support to the idea of doing like a pay study for some reason we're not attracting people to that job class?

Oh we're always open to that.

Okay.

Ending uh the city's current financial uh issues, but yeah, we're always open to the recruitment or retention uh issue.

The commission has been very responsive to pay studies relative to the chief be open to working if this goes this way, would the chief be open to supporting like a compensation study why these job classes can't have consistently been hard to fill.

Yes, and that and actually Chief Landry would be the one who would oversee such things.

Okay, that's in her her arena.

Because yeah, I think that's typically that's traditionally one of the signals when we can't fill a job class, uh isn't what the what's keeping people from being attracted to is one of the first questions.

Right.

I will say we do have registers for equipment operators right now.

There's there's no requisitions moving to fill vacancies doing.

Okay, this does uh the issue I'm talking about does predate the um budget freeze.

Okay, thank you.

Okay.

And Amy, just for clarification, you did say it's possible to leave uh block of employees behind.

If there was an issue in terms of transferring them due to the background, I think that might be one potential solution is just to leave a small unit behind.

But leave them behind where in DPW.

So okay, they'll stay there.

Stay there.

Because again, we're not gonna put anybody out of work because the terms of employment change due to their department.

That would be all right.

We have it.

Um Amy just answered.

Uh I wanted a point of clarity to make sure no one would lose their job uh with this transfer.

That that'd be most important.

But uh firefighters are uh in favor of the transfer of the unit over to police.

Um our response is regularly hindered uh on a regular basis by the way things are currently functioning because of the bottleneck trying just like you said, trying to move up a chain of command down another and then back up to try and get those trucks.

We regularly have fire hydrants blocked, corners blocked, sometimes our fire stations uh trucks are trapped inside the house, sometimes on a few occasions been all night long, and we haven't been able to get uh the units moved, so that hinders response, uh which is dangerous for our first responders as well as citizens.

So, what you're saying, what I'm hearing you say is just based on experience, safety has been either compromised or has been difficult to because all the different commands.

Yeah, trying to trying to get some money out in a timely manner, having to go through uh you know different channels to get it where we can contact police right away immediately on fire grounds or uh to get a response and we get a timely uh response from PD uh every time.

So uh I I would urge the commission to approve this, it's a very important request, and all civil servants will benefit from this.

Okay, thank you.

Thank you.

Do we have any other speakers?

Absolutely.

Okay, open.

Does anybody want to speak?

You could come up to the podium, you have three minutes, please.

And state your name for the record, please.

Hey, don't my name is Brian Joseph.

Hi, Brian.

So when y'all see y'all wouldn't be able to take people, I'm sorry, under the microphone.

I wouldn't be able to take people with records.

But anyway, that's the majority of us.

I'm sorry, say that again.

When y'all say y'all can't take people with records, that's the majority of us.

So they say not the majority, but what I'm saying, you know, that that's hurt that hurts a lot of people.

And if y'all need tone around a c around the co uh clock, they don't eliminate eight hours.

Well, I think that's what they're trying to address.

So two things I want to make sure that that I heard before the commission today.

But those who cannot transfer to police, they're either going to uh leave you in in public works or they're gonna figure something, but people are not going to lose their job.

All right, it's just gonna look different, right?

Or either it's going to be a different uh component, but they're still gonna remain employed.

Well, if y'all need more services with tolling on the tolling side, well allow us to work more hours.

Give us a radio where y'all can call us and say, hey, this is emergency, come over here and move these vehicles.

Well, I think that is something that probably is something that's not under the commission.

That's one of the um issues that we have, and we plan on issuing uh police radios to everyone, and again, that's gonna be a part of our plan to uh better communicate and get the job done.

Okay, okay.

But I guess what I'm hearing is today, right now in your role, you have no radios.

We have radios, but we can't communicate with NOPD.

Right, and they're not on our okay, thank you.

We can't so if it's a so if it's a fire going on and they need to get their fire trucks out and because they're blocked.

But if we can hear it, if they can say if they can relay it to us, we could we'll come get it quick.

But I think that's what they're proposing.

They're trying to say let's remove the reason why you cannot communicate with OPD.

So we're gonna give you the equipment and you could directly do that.

I think your other issue, what I'm hearing you saying is like, hey, what does that look like?

Because some of us, you know, have some things in our past that may not meet the muster, but you're gonna just, you know, it i if this is to be approved, that's gonna have to be on a case-by-case basis, and we're hoping that it works out for the positive versus any adverse things that you may be concerned about.

But but ultimately what the commission, the classified service is saying, you will remain a classified employee regardless of where the background kind of shakes out whether you move forward or if you have to be staying your current position.

That's what I'm hearing.

But I'm also hearing, and I want Amy to make sure I heard this correctly, they will remain in Department of Public Works.

If they're unable to transfer to police because of those requirements, the legal requirements.

So they'll stay right where they are today.

Either that or we would find another department in their same job title.

So we would just have to see what works out best.

And I'm sorry, could you fill out a call?

All right, I'm sorry.

I actually do not anticipate a lot of people being impacted.

Okay.

I mean, really and truly, um, I don't want people to be fearful.

Um if there's a felony, we already know.

And so you can you can quietly let us know.

We're not in to embarrass anyone.

But people do have criminal backgrounds that are not gonna keep them from being able to transfer, but just I don't expect a whole lot of people to be honestly impacted.

So but does that mean you review this information and you have a really good idea?

Have you gone over these records or something?

No, we have not gone over their records because um we have to get permission from each employee to run their names in the national database.

Yeah, so you don't really know for sure.

Correct, right?

Because you would have to get an updated background.

Correct.

It's updated because obviously that's a concern here.

Sure.

You know, look, I look holistically at people, and only if I'm required by law in certain situations.

So that's why I don't want people to be overly concerned.

Don't just assume, uh, just you know, let us know, and we will work with you.

But I I'm just required by law, I wouldn't be able to do the felony.

Understood.

Thank you.

You want to say can I can I ask one other question?

Kind of an um you you say the reason that they have to have a um they can't have a felony is because they um are uh have access to a certain database.

Yes, sir.

Is there a white do they need access to that database?

They would just have it, they wouldn't be able to.

Also, they're gonna be um privy to data from from police, and that's that cannot be compromised.

Uh like the channels he's uh he's asking about the radio channels.

They do not have access to that at this point because you don't have the clearance um, so that would affect access to the radio channels in addition.

Or additional channels.

Okay, it's fun to check just no, it's fair.

It's a very fair question because that's a normal question to say, well, can I just uh firewall it?

Yeah, and that wouldn't be able to do that.

All right, okay.

We have Ms.

Tamika Davis.

Miss Davis, please Hello.

How y'all doing?

Good morning.

So speaking of microphone, yeah.

But you can pull it down, it should be in.

There you go.

All right.

So um I have a few questions and concerns.

All right.

My first, what I want to let you guys know is we don't just sit around a pound.

We uh we serve the public, okay.

So when they say uh like uh fireman guys uh, you know, talk about uh fire hydrants block and different things like that.

Uh we're not just sitting at the yard.

We're removing vehicles from driveways.

We are patrolling the area, we are assisting police.

We're doing different things.

There's a lot of things that we do.

Um so no, we may not always be available to get that particular vehicle at that fire hydrant at that time.

I think all in all, it's a big communication barrier that can easily be fixed, but I don't think that was ever taken into consideration.

I think it was just let's just do the merge, and it was more about a control issue versus fixing a communication barrier.

Um another thing is we probably can't attract drivers because we don't make that much money.

You have to actually like the job and want to do the job to be here.

Yes, the benefits work, but once the benefits are, you know, you have paid for your benefits, your take home pay is not much.

And these last two months has really been crucial, but that's what we deal with.

Yet we still show up.

Nobody asked us how we felt.

Again, your words, it really didn't matter.

And that was kind of, you know, it hurt a little bit.

Because we do have a voice and we do matter.

And even if we do come over to NOPD, if we decide to go somewhere else, then what?

I mean, take us in consideration.

We are humans as well.

And yes, we do have a voice and a choice.

Don't just I mean, it was just like, well, kind of saying we don't have a choice, okay?

Uh that's just that's that's pretty much what I wanted to say.

Think about us.

It's not about us right now.

Yes, we are doing the work out in the public.

We are.

We're not just sitting at the pound doing absolutely nothing.

May I speak to that?

Yes, you may.

Yeah, I appreciate that.

First of all, I really do.

And actually, that's why I pulled the request away, because y'all did not want to come.

Uh or at least the majority.

So I did hear you, I did take that in consideration.

I'm like you, I have bosses, and the bosses have given me direction that they would like for y'all to come over.

I would like for you to.

I watch your work every day, and I think y'all are excellent at what you do.

I really do.

This is now a matter of of government function situation.

So I did hear you, and I do respect y'all, and that's why I said I wasn't interested in a hostile takeover.

And I'm sorry, what's your name again?

My name is Tamika Davis.

Okay, Miss Davis and Chief.

First of all, I don't know how many times I had my car towed away.

So I you know, I'm like, I know you're doing your job.

You're doing them well.

Okay, and every time I'm going to retrieve it, that's right.

Never a problem.

So pleasant.

Yeah.

But having said that, I do have I you you mentioned something.

You said communication barrier.

And you say control issue.

What do you mean?

Control.

So when I say that, okay, it's a lack of communication.

And when the police want something done, who they are communicating with.

You know, it's not, they're not communicating with our supervisors as a whole.

So if you just communicate with probably one person, and that person on transfer information at the time or before time, then uh it's not getting passed down to where it needs to be.

So have they tried fixing it?

Or is it this is who we communicating with, this is what we're doing, and we are not reaching out to nobody else.

Who's the who's dealing directly with the workers?

You know, has that person being taken into consideration?

You know, there's a lot of conversations that probably should have took place, should have taken place with a lot of people prior to just saying we just gonna take over the department because if we do it, we're gonna do a better job than what's being done without taking everybody as a whole into consideration.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Next, do we have another speech?

Leander Kraft.

State your name for the record again.

I'm sorry, didn't you?

My name is Leander Kraft.

Um one of the touring supervisors for the touring division, been doing it for 17 years.

Uh I'm gonna be one of them employees that's gonna be on that list.

So I'm gonna lose my job.

No, we didn't.

Yeah, no, I'm gonna uh but I I love touring.

I come from tow truck to supervisor.

I did it faster than anybody that did it.

But I want to speak on them communication things, like Mr.

Mika said.

Uh we always had a good relationship with the police department.

Mainly me, because I took it in consideration to take it, and you can ask all the districts, do y'all know me because I take care of all of this stuff.

Um to me, could say it's communication.

I'm saying we've been some of the times we had my degrad, we had six tow trucks that we had to take care of the whole city, and we did it.

Six tow trucks and the four supervisors.

So we never did uh like this guy say about fire hydro and all that.

That's one two o'clock in the morning.

Our third shift, our third shift supervisor has one, is it just one driver.

So yeah, he might be on a fatality on the interstate.

He might be this, you know, I'm saying so there's a whole lot of stuff that we do.

Rightways, oh everything.

So I'm just trying to find out what's gonna be better when we go over here.

That's all that's all I'm saying.

What's gonna be better?

We still gonna be doing the same thing, you know.

That's it.

You know, so I really didn't we had uh the conversation with Miss Landry right there about first meeting.

I had a lot of questions, and you know, I got a lot of backlashes about this and that, you know, and everything, but I just want us to let's look at this further.

Let's look at this further.

That's let's not just jump into it right now because we're gonna lose we're gonna lose some good people.

Then you're gonna be looking for some people.

You know, that's all I'm saying.

You're gonna lose some, you're gonna lose some good tow truck drivers, you're gonna lose some good ticket riders, you're gonna lose some good supervisors, you know what I'm saying?

So let's let's sit down and bring this back to the table, and um, you know, look it over.

Thank you.

Okay, I've been waiting to say something.

So the the chief brings up two of the points within the the motion being considered here, which is the the movement, and and two of them I think are points she makes pretty fairly about communication and efficiency, those are the President Mitchler's point as well, and I I've dealt with it now and then myself.

Um it's actually very easy, it's relatively easy for us.

Um, let's say if we need a fire truck unblocked, very urgent.

It's actually very easy for us to get a police officer there.

It's very easy as for to get in touch, and you're not wrong.

And this is why I brought up what I had speaking spoken with Mr.

Penny about.

Um we need to find a way to attract more people to your ranks.

So there have been vacancies, long-standing vacancies.

Why is that happening?

I I'd love to like look at ways that the civil service can make that job work better for y'all.

But I think what the the chief is offering is the the idea that as far as um the way this service interlocks with other services, there's an efficiency issue, which I would second.

There is a communications issue, which I can guarantee I think you agree, some of y'all have already spoken to.

There's a there's an inability to link these services together.

And yeah, I believe the chief is trying to offer a solution to that in the interest of public safety as a whole.

I I consider y'all public safety workers to a degree, right?

I think you'd agree.

Um the 2024 um amendments to the emperor's pension statute, and um whether the tow truck drivers would by default have to go into emperors, no, they're grandfathered in your existing employees.

They're existing employees, so it's not even they will remain in the city's pension.

Good, they will remain in the pension.

I guess my my my thought on that again.

Thank you, Mr.

Kraft.

Oh, right.

I'm hearing some important things like have we considered possibly with the change because of the backgrounds, you will lose some good employees, meaning coming over, because the the the the point of doing this is just to remove the barriers of communication, but continue because what I what I want to be clear is what I'm not I'm not hearing uh the chief say that you guys are not effective at your job.

I didn't hear anybody say that you guys are not doing your job.

What I'm hearing, it's an operational problem, whereas to get to the good employees, we have to jump through all of these hoops and come down the elevator just to get something done.

And what they're trying to do is the city, which is her boss is saying, hey, we think it's better that we align the the staff at public works directly with police.

On the back end, what I'm hearing you guys say is I get that, but in order to do that, it impacts us in this way.

Number one, we love our jobs.

Number two, we may have some issue that doesn't align for us to come over.

So in my so in my question to you, Chief, is how do we not lose those good employees?

Because then again, you're bringing them over, and then you're gonna have a deficiency, a gap, because you're gonna have to start looking for people who have that institutional knowledge.

All right, thank you, thank you.

All right, I want to be perfectly clear.

I think y'all are great.

I mean, I really do.

Yeah, uh, I think you I even try to get my brother up to buy a tow truck.

He doesn't live here.

I think that work is is great.

Okay, so I personally, this chief, if I thought it was an issue of y'all not being excellent, I'd be saying to my bosses, oh no, I don't know, we gotta do something different.

So y'all need to be perfectly clear that I think you're really good.

Okay.

This is purely a functional decision, and one that our city council has requested clearly, one that my mayor aligns with, my deputy mayor aligns with, and it was a request.

I would like to have them, not only because I think they're good, I really do.

Now, if someone cannot transfer over, I think the city, and we can talk about some potential maybe things that could be done.

But I don't want to see anyone lose a job.

Like that's no one's got a losing job.

If I could revisit to Amy uh right quick, if a person is left behind in the department of works, will they still have toy as a function?

So the I you know, just on the off the cuff, it would be like, oh, if you had to leave a small pool of parking enforcement people behind and one supervisor, right?

Or if you had to leave a tow truck behind and two people on that tow truck.

That's what I would agree.

So it's possible they could still be showing.

I was listening to the um, I'm sorry, Mr.

Kraft, who said you know your name, Mr.

Kraft, yeah.

Toeing is important to him, 17 years is something that he's doing.

He apparently seems to love what he's doing.

And he's a leader in that department.

Yeah, and I would I would hate to hear that you know he got left behind and he can't tow.

Right.

But this is all he's saying, okay.

If I'm left behind, at least let me continue to be able to have that function in my to me.

That would be what the vision would be.

If if if a background or something precluded them from moving, then you would leave a small group of people in DPW until through attrition when they retire and things like that, then that that small unit can everyone hear the personnel director's response to commissioners uh Davis question.

So I was saying that if they're if because of the background issue, people cannot move to NOPD, then what I would envision is that you would leave us leave whoever can't move back behind in DPW, and there would be small unit in DPW of the people who couldn't transfer, and they would continue to do what they're doing now, and they would just be in that department until such time as through things like retirement and natural attrition, that unit is ultimately goes away on the individual's terms, they can work in that unit as long as they would like, and then the function fully moves to police after the people who couldn't move through attrition leave.

That's all that could work.

So what I'm hearing a personnel director say is that possibly those who wouldn't move over, they would still remain a small unit or a specialized unit in public works.

And as people decide to either leave, move, transfer on their own, or retire, then that unit would ultimately go away when that happened when the last person leaves.

Because you're talking about permanent civil service classified employees that have a right to their job.

Okay.

And so she's reinforcing your right as a classified employee, your property right into your job.

And so that is what the city's commitment to you guys are, unless there's some other things that you know happen due to you know fight financial furloughs or whatever like that.

But um, I think that this is good to hear.

Um it it it makes me feel a little bit better on understanding some some nuances.

It sounds like we have a few more cards.

Okay, so I have something I add right here, too.

This is in the interest of the employees as well.

One of the things I consistently hear from the parking enforcement employees, and I couldn't believe you any more, is that you guys have a tough, dangerous job.

People are not happy when you show up to move their vehicle.

And um it's often been said to me when I see you guys out in the streets that um a police presence current, concurrent with that action is not maybe not required, but certainly desirable.

And I've heard it from NOPD as well.

I've observed myself, we've been attacked in the firehouse, I mean physically attacked for trying to get people to move their cars, trying to while we're waiting on you guys, and I know you guys have less than a sufficient amount on the streets at night.

But that's one of my big concerns where I I I see an upside here, like the chief is describing for y'all's safety as well.

That is removing, I think to achieve that public safety benefit, which everyone deserves from the uh public safety professionals on to the public.

Y'all need a y'all need protection.

I I couldn't agree more.

And so that's just something like I've heard from a lot of uh a lot of the uh the towing enforcement workers myself personally.

That's one of the hindrances as well to that timeliness factor.

So maybe there's like that word synergy applies here.

Okay.

Uh Takisha Feast.

How y'all doing?

Hi.

I'm Takisha.

I've been with the um Department of Public Works for 28 years as a section supervisor.

Um thank you for your service.

The questions I have is pretty much the same thing.

They say it's a communication barrel.

I do I do the scheduling.

So when I don't get anything for any special events, I don't schedule anyone because I don't receive it from the NLPD or whoever in charge of it to give it to me.

So if we don't have it, I don't know how to schedule my 13 drivers at the time.

Um I moving forward, since um Buddy Meach have been sending us emails.

I have been scheduling them in where we need them.

So I think what we're doing now, even though we're not over there, is working what we're doing because it it has been communication where they didn't send us, we didn't have meetings saying that, hey, we have this, we have that, and we need trucks for this, and we need trucks for that.

So I do do a lot of the scheduling for the tow truck drivers.

Um like I don't know your name, but when it comes to the fire hydrants and all that, um, like Mr.

Kraft say, it could be at overnight.

I only have one driver.

You know what I'm saying?

I'm spreading the drivers periodically widely.

You know, they didn't work long hours when I say, Look, I need you to work this, they will work it.

You know what I'm saying?

If I need them to stay longer, they will stay longer.

It's just that we need the information ahead of time so I could let my drivers know that hey, look, they they got this special event coming up.

I might need you to work 12 hour shifts.

And uh, can I add to compliment you or your department?

It may even be you personally.

Remind me your name?

Takesha.

So I don't, I'm thinking of a night recently where I I had to call the tow yard personally, and that supervisor went out on her own.

She had she had one driver out explained to me that resource they were resource bound.

That driver was stuck on, I believe it was like waiting for a police matter in a distant part of town.

Um that driver, if it was you, thank you, whoever it was, thank you.

Put the phone down and got in a tow truck themselves and went out and did it.

So we understand.

I mean, I I'm an advocate for y'all.

And so yes.

Y'all need safety and resources as well.

All right, the five supervisors, they do get in a truck.

And if they need the help where they need the help, they have to help.

And then we have changed the supervisor schedules to us, insert they self in where we need them to go ahead on out in tow vehicles.

So I really truly think that we can sit down and come to a table.

If we can do a trial and error and just work it out right as as it is now, so you can see that it is a communication.

Well, nobody wasn't communicating at one time, but I I'm looking forward.

We are communicating how we're doing now.

Buddy sit down a lot and have meetings with us and say, Hey, I need y'all to do this.

And he would he need us to at the at one time we wasn't getting there, and at one time it was just going to one source of a person, which was never getting back to us as a whole, so we know what to do.

So, what I'm hearing, you're saying you're saying buddy is a buddy, right?

Is it's communicating from police now, it's communicating directly with each other.

Absolutely.

And you say it's working.

It's working to where we are now in communication.

I I think I hear what you're saying on the other lens.

It's kind of speaking to what they're saying, and I don't think y'all realize that.

Um, not a judgment, I'm just hearing what you're saying.

If if if police is talking to you directly, that's what they're saying.

That's what the request is.

It's to kind of take out the the barriers that you guys have been experiencing and kind of move it forward.

And you guys are doing what you've always done, your job very well.

This is not on y'all.

What I'm hearing.

What I'm hearing is they're looking at operation functions that need to be cleaned up to help support y'all do your jobs that extend beyond that that extend behind y'all capacity.

And then also too, supporting you guys.

See, it's about support.

You guys come in before the commission, and and what I'm hearing is saying in the past we haven't been supported, maybe in the best ways as leaders, as a a unit, and you know, if it doesn't feel good because it feels like it's on us.

I'm not hearing that, and I want you guys to be clear.

The commission is not receiving that.

What we're hearing is it's really on a system breakdown and operation, and what the city is requesting is to move whatever barriers, and one of them you've just explained has been working, and that's what they want to put in place.

Again, on the flip side, there's some things that we need to make sure that you feel confident about as far as your status with the city because of maybe it's a background, or maybe what does that look like?

And I'm hoping uh chief that you guys can continue to communicate that so that they can understand a change management process because we understand change is hard for people if if this is approved.

Of course.

You know, the idea is that the Department of Public Works is not necessarily known as a public safety department.

Your police and your fire and your EMS are public safety, and we do see you as public safety.

Yeah, definitely.

And so it's aligning, and so if if um my friends back here, the city council directed me.

I take my directions as well, not only from the Civil Service Commission, but from the city council and the mayor.

We were directed to try to come to you to say we would like to align these functions within the public safety side of the house.

That's what we're talking about.

And um, I hope that helps you understand it's a functionality of putting public safety in the umbrella of public safety.

And and then let me add, thank you, Chief.

But I want I want to be clear what the commission role is to we're advocates, we're neither here or there for political pressure and have it.

We're advocates for the employees and what's best, and for the city, like what it aligns that makes sense, right?

And so I think the decision if the commission does support it or whatever, it's going to be what is reasonable, what has been considered, how does it impact the employees, and how does it help move the city forward?

And so those are some of the things that we want you to know that the commission is a neutral party, and we're taking all of the information from both sides, and we have to make a best decision based on what is presented before us.

And so I don't want anyone to feel like this morning.

I mean, it's after me in the morning.

Oh my gosh.

Um, this afternoon that that your voices are on heard.

I really appreciate the chief of coming forward and kind of clarifying what she can, and I want you guys to hear so that you can ask informed questions.

Um, and so do we have another speaker card, two more cars?

We have our value cast.

Well, the next speaker approaches, I just say that I think efficiency is the right word here because we are worried about y'all.

One of my biggest concerns about y'all is the things I've heard consistently about your your own concerns for your safety, particularly in the middle of the night when there's only one truck or so.

Hi, say your name directly.

Good evening, everyone.

Thank you for being here, the panel.

Thank you, Chief.

First time meeting you.

Nice to meet you.

Talk with you from several times, Stephanie.

Thank you, everyone, for being here.

I am Valerie Petty.

I serve as the parking administrator.

I have both sewing and ticket writing divisions.

And I'm speaking not on behalf of myself, but on behalf of the staff because they're speaking of the merger, but no one has a plan of what's gonna happen once the merger is in place.

Most of the things that we're hearing now is on the towing side.

And they're saying that the towing unit is now communicating with Buddy, and things are flowing.

What we need to become more efficient is more staffing.

We're there.

When you call us, we're responding.

When you need us, we're on scene.

Just last week, we wrote over 175.

We told over 175 vehicles.

We can do more if you supply us with more staffing.

We don't mind working with NOPD.

We will work wherever we're needed.

We just need more staffing.

The reason why I'm more concerned on what's gonna happen next is 93 percent of the parking division is of single mother or single parent household.

They only work eight-hour shifts.

They are concerned that merging over, they're gonna be obligated to 12-hour shifts because of the special events that's going on in the city.

Right now, we're not needed at every special event.

But going to NOPD, they do fear that they're gonna have to be on scene, all call all the time in their only civil servants.

They only work eight hours.

So, what is the next plan for that staff?

No one has presented anything.

We also talk about it's not a I'm glad you mentioned that you don't want it to be a hustle takeover.

But in a sense, it seems that way.

Because I there was a meeting this morning about my grade operations.

I wasn't in that meeting, I wasn't invited, but my staff was.

So let me know what's going on so that I can communicate that to Ticket Writing and we all can work together.

But I was not.

I was just told this coming in the elevator.

I want to say this morning, too, that our budget has already transferred to NLPD.

How can that be?

No one say anything to me, or no one even say anything to the panel.

You guys haven't even voice voted on it, but it's already transferred.

So it just seems like if we're gonna do these things, let's do it together and work together.

It does seem like I have to take over because no one's communicating with everyone.

That's all.

Thank you.

Our last speaker uh is this Felicia Crate.

I'm sorry.

Uh what is your name again?

I am Valerie Petty.

Thank you, Miss Petty.

Appreciate your comments.

Thank you.

Miss Petty.

Can you how did you validate that the budget's been transferred?

Is this somebody just said that?

Or you just how do you validate that?

Because there was a PEO that needed to be paid, and we can't pay that PEO because the trend the budget has already been transferred to NOPD.

So now we have to find a way to make those things.

Okay.

So by payroll.

Yes.

Okay.

Not payroll.

Um, you out of budget.

But you're validating it for us by payroll.

Yes.

Gotcha.

Thank you.

Can somebody who's in towing tell me what is the current fine to get one's car out of when your car gets towed and locked up?

What is that fine?

No, I have a reason for asking, but there's I don't actually know.

What is it?

It's a couple hundred.

2012.

Sorry.

2012.

Okay, so it's about 200 to retrieve your car.

Thank you.

Thank you.

And plus any outstanding citations you may have.

You have to resolve all those before you're able to retrieve your vehicle.

Okay, thank you.

Well, that's a flex.

Y'all know them numbers, huh?

Thank you.

Come forward.

Good evening.

Good evening.

And thanks everyone for being here.

Chief Stephanie, of course, I know.

Um, I'm Delicia Creighton, Ground Transportation Bureau Administrator.

And to piggyback on what Ms.

Petty just expressed, it's the same concerns with ground transportation.

Staffing.

Currently, I don't know if y'all are aware of what all grounds transportation actually permit, but we have a huge industry with the far higher industry.

School bus, of course, is our biggest.

And with school bus alone, we have almost 1,800 school bus, and we have entirely four employees of office staff that handles the first part of processing those school bus and other parts of the far high industry.

Currently, we may be down to three employees in office because one is up for retirement.

Um we hoping she stayed because we need her, and we cannot hire without investigation side.

That's the side that Buddy is very well familiar with because that's our field employees who go out in the field and handle inspections with your taxi casts, petty cabs, and so forth.

But they also handle a lot at the station where the vehicles actually come in, and we simply need staffing.

So to piggyback on Mr.

Kraft, Tamika, Petty, with grounds transportation, the issue is not efficiency nor enforcement.

Thank you for saying we do our job because on both sides, parking and uh ground transportation, the employees are doing the best they could do.

Staffing is the issue.

If we all have more staffing, then efficiency and timing and everything else, operational will work, but we just don't have the staff to cover the requirements from the public.

So it's not that the operational is not functioning well, and I'm sorry, I have 35 years with the city, most of it with parking control, and I managed the autopilot uh for eight years.

Communication was not the barrier.

We always communicated with NOPD, but since January of last year, Buddy does communicate more.

It's not that he never did, it's just coming more flexible now because of what happened on January the 1st.

But it's staffing.

That is the issue for both units, staffing.

If we could get more staff, everybody will function timely.

The fire hydrants definitely will be because that's a pet peeve for me to see a fire hydro blocked, so it would be done, but they can only do what they could do with the staff that's currently available.

Amy, do you know the last time?

Budget issues aside.

Do you know the last time like a pay study was done on the classifications that are considered here?

I did a pace study for job for ground transportation bureau, and it has already been basically approved by civil service, but budget it is frozen.

But I did job study for ground transportation.

And that's possibly something the administration moving forward could look at whether fees to the city or something can offset any cost.

Right, right.

It's Commissioner Monteverdi.

One of the reasons I asked about that price, I don't think it's in my wheelhouse to make this decision, but like creatively thinking, these are fines that you could almost pass on to the lawbreaker.

And um, I don't know how that plays in.

I'm not saying I'm not suggesting, I'm just saying if we're looking at ways to make your guys' job be recognized financially for the hard work you do, right?

Um, and put aside some of these fears.

Staffing is everything, it is right.

Um these other efficiencies aside.

Thank you.

Could you say to your name again for me again?

Delicia Craig.

Thank you, Miss Creighton.

Appreciate it.

Is that all the cards?

Okay.

Um, Commissioner, so at the point we need to make a decision.

Um, Chief, the the thing that my takeaway that if the commission was to approve this, I would hope that you know, um, administration and your department could definitely look and consider staffing, considering the budget issues, like again, be creative, looking at how to support staff requests.

Um, and um captain uh the same thing.

Um plan, like like um it was uh Valerie and Miss Denisia said, like a plan, bring the leaders in, discuss the plan, have a discussion about what the move would look like and how it changes operation.

I think being at the table would help again for them to communicate to their direct reports um some of the things that that may occur if this is approved, and last um again, just meeting with the leaders, right?

Like bringing them to the table, no matter what that looks like.

That would be something that chief that I hope that would you be open to or kind of like structure that you have it.

Okay, you'll have that.

Okay.

I'm a great negotiator for staffing folks, so you know, I'll I will lobby.

I have ideas already what I would do to help try to increase their staffing and all the things.

And just add maybe bringing leaders to the table as you're looking at the SOPs, because I'm pretty sure there's things that are outdated that need to be changed, and it may things that you don't know because boots on the ground, they have experience, especially like with Mr.

Kraft and uh Ms.

Tamika, like who've been there for a while, probably be able to add value to any plan moving forward.

Absolutely.

I've met with um Miss Petty and Miss Creighton initially to start the process, but again, before it's not approved, so we're kind of stagnant, waiting for a decision by the commission.

Okay.

Commissioners, do we have any other questions?

Are we ready for a motion?

No, I would just make a comment.

Um I think Chief uh Kirk Patrick said it already for the most part, but I think you know, public works, when you look at what they do, they're they they maintain and build city infrastructure.

And so I'm not sure that how that fits with what you guys are doing right now.

But when you look at public safety with police and fire are responsible for, you guys really do fit in there, and you would enhance public safety with better communications.

If we've heard that constantly, communications could improve as one of the major things.

The other thing though is authority, and you can have all the communications in the world, but if you don't have the authority to go do something different, and it's not gonna help public safety effort.

So if you have communications aligned with the authority, um, and I know staff is gonna be an issue no matter where you are, so don't think it's you know gonna get worse under police than it is now.

It's probably not gonna get any worse.

It might get better because police is public safety.

And I think public safety is really the key to this.

If you think about it, you're you guys are more in the line with public safety than you are with public work.

So that's just a comment.

And from just one quick comment.

I think, and it's very important to me as a member of this civil service commission.

Those who know me, I I just like to know what the plan is.

And I like to know the plan ahead of time because I need to digest information.

I really got some really good information from everybody here, so I thank you, and I appreciate that.

Thank you so much, Chief.

But one thing that I want to add to what um our chair said, and she listed uh salaries, uh plan, but I think we also need to list guaranteed job security.

This is what they need to hear.

This is what important guarantee job security that for whatever reason on the back end, nobody's gonna come up with something that we missed or overlooked or didn't think about thank you.

Commissioner Munda Voter, no, the last statement I think I covered it.

I'd like I would just like to, and I think they confirmed that they're interested in the chiefs is interested in seeing how to use the revenue that is generated from these fines to maybe, if possible, enhance the ability to attract and retain the under the pay plan.

Okay.

So at this time, commissioners considering all that was heard today, and all that the commission has expressed what they would like to see if this was approved or not approved for whatever reason.

Do we have a motion at this time?

And I'm gonna open it to four.

Is it is there a motion either way?

I would make a move motion to approve the transfer to I would second that motion.

Okay, so we have a motion.

Do we have a second?

Umstentions or objections at this time.

Okay, we have one abstentions.

All in favor, please say aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Motion carries.

Okay.

And again, um, so please guys do not be defeated in this.

Again, Chief, what I understood is that there are going to be the next step will be a plan of action to make sure that leaders and staff are communicated, correct?

Thank you, Commissioner.

So I appreciate it.

Thank you, Chief.

Thank you, everybody.

I agree.

Okay, Commission, back to our regularly uh scheduled programming.

Uh item one are the minutes from December 12th, 2025.

Give them a few minutes to exit.

Okay, so we had a motion for approval of the minutes on the floor.

I'll say I think you were the you were the first.

So we have a motion on our floor to approve minutes.

Uh yes.

Yeah, we just need a second.

A second.

We need a second.

Oh second.

Okay.

All in favor, please say aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Motion carries.

Thank you, Commissioners.

Item number two are the ratification of public integrity bureau extension requests.

Any speaker cards?

Uh no, Commissioner.

Commissioners, do I have a motion to approve?

I'll move to approve.

Do I have a second?

Second.

All in favor, please say aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Motion carries.

Thank you, Commissioner.

Item number three A under rule amendments was is a proposed amendment to rule two sections 4.9, 4.11, A and B, Section 5 and Section 11.1 relative to the alternative dispute resolution process.

So Commissioners, as you recall, this item was introduced as our at our last meeting.

This is an outcropping of the commission subcommittee on the disciplinary appeals process.

So again, this was introduced.

So I may I made clear that a motion to enforce would be before the commission and would not be in court.

A motion to enforce the arbiter's decision would then come to the commission if usually the city did not abide by the decision.

So it's those proposed changes plus that slight amendment, which I've highlighted like and so this is the time we need to either approve or any questions, Commissioners.

Do we have a motion at this time?

I'll move to approve.

It sounds like we have a motion and a second.

All in favor, please say aye.

Aye.

Any abstentions or objections?

Motion carries.

Thank you, Commissioners.

Item number three B is a proposed amendment to Rule 2, Section 8.1 relative to applications for the issuance of subpoenas.

And same thing, this was introduced at our last uh commission meeting.

And what this one does is just align what the period is for the submission of request for subpoenas with what our current practice is, and that's to allow uh people up to 10 days before the um the hearing to submit it.

Um currently it's 15 days.

So uh just to move things along, we're giving people uh more of an opportunity so the window expands before the hearing to let people issue subpoenas.

Okay.

Commissioners, do we have a motion at this time?

We have a motion to approve.

Do I have a second?

A second.

All in favor, please say aye.

All right, aye.

Motion carries.

Thank you, Commissioners.

Item number four A under recruitment and selection matters is the approval of examination announcements 11459 to 11463.

Commissioners, you'll notice that your packet is much smaller than normal, and that is a result of the current hiring freeze in city government.

So if you if you'll notice a lot of the positions are at the airport because they're not under the general fund.

I'm sorry.

Did the last group of people here know about the hiring freeze?

Yeah, it's pretty well known throughout the workforce.

Why they ask if a staff well I think they're just speaking generally, like it's a chronic problem.

Right.

That's a good point.

Okay, so we'll ask for approvement of those uh examinations.

Okay.

Wait, say it again.

Good question.

But uh I'll move to approve the examination.

I'll second okay.

Okay, well, we have a motion in the second any abstentions or rejection here and then motion carries.

To answer Commissioner Davis's question, sometimes when there's a hiring freeze, some positions get through because maybe they're revenue generating, and sometimes like ticket writers are looked at as revenue generating positions.

Um so sometimes even when there's a freeze, it's not a total freeze.

Yeah.

Um so that's why they're probably still advocating for additional staffing even in the face of time.

Okay, I didn't know that.

Thank you.

Okay, um, item number four B under recruitment and selection matters is approval of provisional appointments in accordance with rule six, section five point three A.

And we have Shauna Parker on our team here today.

She is the head of our recruitment and selection division.

Alrighty, good afternoon.

Welcome.

Thank you.

At least she didn't say good morning.

All righty.

Um so as Amy stated, we're here to ask for um approval of an extension for provisional appointments in accordance with rule six, section five point three A.

Um, this is a matter that we usually bring before the commission yearly in January.

Um, our rules specify that staff are authorized to approve provisional appointments while any appointment extending beyond one year requires action formal approval by the commission.

Um, a provisional appointment, just as a reminder, is used when no active eligible is exist, and the selected individual must meet the minimum qualifications for the position.

So basically, we are here today to request approval of the current list of provisional appointments in accordance with our rule six on section 5.3.

Thank you.

Commissioners, do we have any questions at this time or do we have a motion on the floor?

I'll move to approve.

We have a motion to approve.

Do I have a second?

Second.

Okay.

Any abstentions or objections?

Hearing none.

All in favor, please say aye.

Aye.

Motion carries.

Thank you.

Thank you, Commissioners.

And that's all the business we have before you today.

Oh, we need a motion to adjourn.

Move to adjourn.

Okay.

Thank you, everybody.

Appreciate you.

Thank you all.

Have a great one.

Happy New Year since we're already 15.