Music

Chair, staff is ready when you are.

Good afternoon.

Welcome to the Civil Service Board meeting.

I'm on Monday, January 27, 2025.

The meeting is now called to order.

Will the clerk please call the roll to establish quorum.

Thank you, Chair.

Commissioners, please unmute for roll.

Commissioner a man for?

Here.

Commissioner Bird.

Here.

Commissioner Gonzalez-Cabatic.

Present.

Commissioner Stein.

Present.

And Chair Mula.

Present.

Thank you. We have quorum.

Thank you.

I would like to remind members of the public and chambers that if you would like to speak on an agenda item, please turn in your speaker slip when the item begins.

You will have two minutes to speak once you are called upon.

After the first speaker, we will no longer accept speaker slips and we will now proceed with today's agenda.

Please rise for the opening acknowledgments in honor of Sacramento's Indigenous people and tribal lands.

The original people of this land, the Nisanan people, the southern Maidu valley and plains me walk, putt win-win-tune peoples, and the people of the Wilton Rancheria, Sacramento's only federally recognized tribe.

May we acknowledge and honor the native people came before us and still walk beside us today on this ancestral lands by choosing together together today in the active practice of acknowledgement and appreciation for Sacramento's Indigenous people's history, contribution and lives.

Thank you. Please remain standing for the pledge of allegiance.

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible with liberty and justice for all.

The first business today is approval of the consent calendar clerk. Are there any members of the public who wish to speak on the consent calendar?

Thank you, Cherry. Yes, we have one speaker for this item or speaker will be Shelby.

All right, we have 30 seconds or two minutes. All right, so I was here for the last meeting on the 22nd.

And even when on the website, there was no calendar, there was just like a meeting. You guys need to add that and inform the community because some of us do go to other meetings and work with other people.

And like I've worked on some funding for some programs with Katrina Telemantis. And I was at the meeting on the 22nd.

They're bats from last year. So we'll just help if you guys inform the public because even adding that might help some of other members or other districts or other counties like Yolo.

And I yield my time. That's all I need to say. Thank you for my time.

Are there any other members of the public who wish to speak on the item?

Thank you, Cherry. We have no other speakers for this item.

Thank you. Are there any members who wish to speak on the item?

Member bird.

So I guess I am confused about what our speaker was referring to. It's not being the agenda not being calendared or not being on the website. I wasn't clear what the complaint was.

But the current information that is being represented is. And I just saw the meeting information.

Like when I clicked on the link, I know the link for that calendar that has a talking about so that people could vote.

Because I guess I'm.

Member bird. I would. We are our agenda was on the website.

Right. That's what I'm looking right now.

We're a brown act body, which means our agenda is posted at least 72 hours in advance.

And so.

So thank you very much for that comment.

I know it's not. I know it's not a back and forth at this point. I just was double checking because I'm looking at my.

What I see when I get notice, you know, when the city says reminder, whatever, and my ability to look it up online, and I was just double checking myself.

So thank you for the clarification.

Thank you. Are there any other members who wish to speak on the item?

Okay. So on the consent calendar, then do I have a motion?

Motion to move.

Approval. Yes.

Okay. Thank you. Is there a second?

Second. Okay. Motion by member.

Man for second by member.

Cabbatic.

Gonzales. Cabbatic. Sorry.

Clerk, will you please call the roll?

Thank you, chair. Commissioners, please unmute for vote.

Commissioner a man for? Yes.

Commissioner bird. I.

Commissioner Gonzales. Cabbatic.

Commissioner sign. I.

Ann. Chair Miele. I. Thank you. Motion passes.

Thank you. We will now proceed with the discussion calendar.

And that discussion calendar is selection of chair and vice chair for the calendar year of 2025.

Is there a motion or are there any members of the public who wish to speak on this item?

Thank you, chair. Yes, we have one speaker for this item. Shelby?

Yes.

Okay. Sorry. Which item are you on?

I was writing something.

Election of chair and vice chair for calendar year of 2025.

Okay. So that goes back to my first thing.

I think that's a good question.

But maybe adding like a live chat or zoom for people who have questions before maybe 78 hours.

That you guys get the notice would help people because some of us you know work with the community.

You know and churches and outreach with the homeless and I talk with them all the time.

And a lot of people even if they're homeless they pay money and they pay taxes like everybody else.

So it's a good question.

If I want to help.

Adding something available.

And maybe someone that, if they do outreach.

Maybe end up hiring them or something.

You know, because you know I don't know.

A lot of people are qualified MAC.

And I was talking to a guy who work with Katie Venezuela.

So, you know, stuff like that when it gets motion and approved,

that helps them, you know, get into a job

because sometimes politics are being working for certain people like Katie

because their political views can also block her staff

and create them to get low jobs or homeless.

So that would just help adding certain services

and maybe letting the welfare office, you know, be like,

hey, we have this opportunity.

Would you like to help us with these projects or programs?

I'm just allowing that to become a programmer project

and I yield my time.

Okay, thank you.

Are there any other members of the public who are just speaking on the item?

Thank you, Chair there, no other speakers for the item.

Are there any members who wish to speak on the item?

No, then do I have a motion?

Motion to nominate.

Sorry, our nomination.

Yes, sorry, meant to nomination.

Motion to nominate, uh, Katherine Miele.

I appreciate that very much, but I actually cannot serve

because I've already served for two years.

So, for our rules, I'm not eligible to serve as Chair again.

Hi, Heather Brantley with the Office of the City Clerk.

For Chair, it looks like everyone is available except for Chair Miele

and Commissioner Bird.

And then for Vice Chair, it looks like everyone is available except for Vice Chair.

Already Vice Chair?

I'm sorry.

Guns all is chaotic and Commissioner and man for.

So I nominate Commissioner Gondola's about it.

A second.

A third.

For the position of Chair, just declare a vote.

For the position of Chair, thank you.

Yes, that's an eligible for Vice Chair.

Great.

And is that there's a second by Commissioner Manfor?

Actually, it was time.

Okay, Commissioner Stain, second.

Clerk, will you please call the roll?

Thank you, Chair.

And just to make sure I have my information correctly, that was a nomination for Commissioner

Gondola's Cabbatic for Chair, moved by Commissioner Bird, seconded by Commissioner Stain.

Yes, thank you.

Commissioner, please unmute for vote.

Oh, do you accept that?

Oh, the pressure.

In public.

Okay, I'll accept.

Okay, so now we'll go ahead and do the vote.

Commissioner Manfor?

Aye.

Commissioner Bird.

Aye.

Commissioner Guns all is chaotic.

Aye.

Commissioner Stain?

Aye.

And Chair Miele.

Aye.

Thank you, motion passes.

Thank you.

Can I make a nomination for Vice?

Yes.

Chair, I'd like to nominate Commissioner Stain for Vice Chair.

Is there a second?

Second.

Go ahead.

Seconded by, I think, Manfor.

It's okay.

Commissioner Manfor.

Be it.

And Commissioner Stain, do you accept the nomination for Vice Chair?

Okay.

Great.

Clerk, will you please call the roll?

Thank you, Chair.

And the motion is nominating Commissioner Stain for Vice Chair, moved by Commissioner Gondola's

Cabbatic, seconded by Commissioner Manfor.

Please unmute for vote.

Oh, good.

Are we good?

Yeah, I just want to make sure that if there was a secondary nomination, if someone...

We actually vote on this first, and then if it fails, then we ask for a second nomination.

But yeah, thank you.

Member, a manfor?

Yeah, I, sorry.

Member Bird.

Aye.

Member Guns all is chaotic.

Aye.

Member Stain?

Aye.

And Chair Miele?

Aye.

Thank you, motion passes.

Okay.

Do you want to move over to the seat to run the rest of the meeting?

Okay.

Yes.

No, I understand that.

Okay.

Sounds good.

Okay.

All right.

Moving on then to the next item, which is the...on the discussion calendar, item number three,

the file of the qualification of Kevin Meek from the fire engineer recruitment.

Are there any members of the public who wish to speak on this item?

Thank you, Chair.

Yes, we do have a speaker for this item.

Shelby?

Are we on item three?

Yes.

Okay.

Is this...oh, the fire engineer, I just seen that.

You know, now that I did choose to speak, I always go to the Asian Resource Center or I

go to the El Hogar Center as well as Hope Cooperative.

And I know you guys have a recruitment thing, but I think working on some outreach, because

I noticed that like the youth centers, they get most of the jobs or like they stop at

30.

I'm 34.

So like the recruitment programs need to really work on, you know, the age limit.

It's like allowing people to be recruited until they're 48.

That would help working on the age, upping the age limit then to 18 or 38.

I know parks and red has a program where they have age limit.

I pass an exam, but you know, they have so many restrictions working for the city for

some of these programs that you guys got to work on that.

And that's, you know, there's a lot of homeless youth right now.

So with the recruitment, the out, they need to also work on having an outreach program,

which will help with the recruitment, because there's a lot of people who come here from

many, many countries as refugees, asylum seekers, like I'm first generation my father, but

I'm sixth generation my mother.

So me, my father, we don't speak good English.

So we just help to work on that and maybe allowing the recruitment program to get like certificates

once they either graduate or they finish the job of recruitment of, you know, you did

this job.

So you get that certificate for that fire engineer job as an assistant or even a recruiter.

So are you my time because it's up?

Okay.

Thank you.

Is Mr. Kevin, oh, you have another public speaker?

Grace.

We have one other speaker for this item, a Miss Rockefeller.

I'm not seeing movement, Jared.

No.

Okay.

And is Kevin me present?

Okay.

Did you, would you like to speak on this item, sir?

Okay.

Great.

One up.

No.

Do I have to know?

Good afternoon.

Good afternoon.

Thank you for letting me allow me to speak today.

The reason for my challenge letter of the fire recruitment or the fire engineer recruitment

process was during my exam, I was given a zero for the drafting evolution.

At no time during the recruitment process, during the preparation process, was a full outline

of what was going to be asked for during the drafting process or any of the processes

in the exam, the practical exam.

Not until the scores actually came out, was there a full preparation of what should have

been taken place?

During the exam, I was allowed to draft, which I did, also pumping hand lines off of my

draft, which I did.

The reason for the zero on my drafting was a critical failure.

There was no, there was in my, in my opinion, there was no safety violation that, that

would, should receive a critical failure.

I did however, pump that line.

I did however, perform a draft very capable.

Right here in the exam preparation manual, due to the nature of engineer position in

the exam, there will be a critical failure.

In the safety of you, an assessor or an observer is in jeopardy or if there's a high likelihood

that the equipment will be damaged, the exercise will be stopped.

At no time was any individuals or any equipment in danger of being damaged or injured.

After the exam, I was told by the subject matter experts, which are Sacramento Fire personnel,

that I would receive all points up until the failure, which was at the very end of the

test.

I actually told the committee, or excuse me, the proctors, when I was done.

Then they said, time out, there was a critical failure.

What that was was that they said I did not pump to the specified, within 30 PSI above or

below the specified pressure.

At the very end of the test, a critical failure of that magnitude is egregious, in my opinion.

In my opinion, I should have received points up until that point where they said that

I should have been stopped, which was the end of the test and I had already told them

I was done.

If I don't receive the points, what I would like in the future is that there is more clarification

between the city, the subject matter experts, and the union as to what the critical failures

are and maybe even the candidates and line it out for the candidates because we don't know

going in what's a critical failure or what's not.

We don't even know that we're supposed to pump headlines off of a draft.

In my opinion, I should receive the points up until that point, the subject matter experts

said I would also did the union representation at that time.

Thank you.

I know that there's just a presentation as well, which we'll hear from next.

But prior to that point, does anyone have any questions for Mr. Meek?

Commissioner Bird?

Hi.

If you had received all the points that you're contending that you would have received

up until the end, would that have put you in a position to be eligible for the promotion?

I would already be promoted now.

Yes.

Any other questions for Mr. Meek?

No.

Okay.

Thank you.

We still may.

I ask you to wait until the item is finished.

And then is there a staff presentation on the site?

Yes.

Sorry.

I could do this.

Good afternoon.

Would you like me to go through my formal presentation all the way through or would you

like me just to address the questions that were brought forward?

Anyone have any opinions or requests?

I might suggest he'd start with the addressing the issues, but if we have further questions,

we may go back.

Is that okay with folks?

Any objections?

No.

So it sounds like I don't know if you heard Commissioner Bird, but if you could just address

the questions and that if we have additional questions, you may have to do more of your

presentation.

Totally fine.

Just wanted preference.

So in regards to the, there's a series of pieces going on here regarding the appeal

response in terms of the examination, the assessors that we use are independent assessors.

Sorry, they're not, they're external assessors.

Let me rephrase that.

That we bring in that are at or above the classification for this recruitment and they're

the ones that do the rating criteria that is predetermined in our exam development process.

That content is developed in our exam development process, which includes working with city HR

with subject matter experts in the department who are at or above the classification in our

experts in knowledge in that field.

In conjunction, in this type of exam, a promotional exam, we use a consultant to build these practical

examination criteria.

So this is the second phase of this practical exam.

So they were asked to do a series of stations that require performing the duties as if

they were on the job as a fire engineer.

So they use, we build all of our examinations off the knowledge, skills, and abilities

required for that classification, not necessarily based on, it's not based on minimum qualifications,

but the things that are needed for this classification.

So with that, we built the exam again with these subject matter experts from the department.

So those subject matter experts are from the department, they're well-versed, and all

of our exams are based off the, sorry, let me grab it.

It's all the standard operating guidelines, any laws, applicable laws, any procedures

that we are required to follow.

And when they take the exam, all applicants, sorry, well, all candidates are told to perform

the exam as part, as if they were in that role, taking on that responsibility.

The exam, regarding some of the materials provided in the report, we identified multiple

areas where we prepped candidates that they, there are critical failures in the exam.

We can't give exact what they are.

We wouldn't have anything to test on if we told them.

It's to assess their knowledge, skills, and abilities to perform, successfully perform

this position.

In our pre-candidate or a pre-exam packet that we sent out, let me get to the quote here.

We said due to the nature of the engineer, and this was in each section for each station.

So appellant meeks referring to the drafting station on all the stations that they were

required to perform the material stated due to the nature of the engineering position

and the exam, there will be critical failures.

If the safety of you and assessor or an observer is in jeopardy, or if there's a high likelihood

that equipment will be damaged, then the exercise will be stopped.

If there's a critical failure, you will receive a zero for that exercise.

So we sent all of this in the report as well.

You can see the notification that went out with this material to all candidates.

All candidates received the same material.

In addition, they received information at the beginning of each station that they needed

to sign, acknowledging that what was going to be asked of them at that station.

Excuse me.

Let's see.

To address the points, you only receive, part of our examination process is you only receive,

if you obtain a critical failure, you do not receive points for that exercise.

It doesn't preclude any of the points from the previous exercises that you took that

you successfully completed.

So there were additional stations at this exam, and all of those points would be counted

as long as there was a critical fail at those stations specific to those exam stations.

So all points were counted up until that point, or after that point, if there was another

station that this candidate was eligible to go to.

In regards to the subject matter experts that are on site and the local 522 rep, as part

of our exam process and has been consistent across all of our promotional exam processes

with the fire department, we allow a subject matter expert and a local 522 rep to be present

for equity to make sure that the exams are equitable and fair across the board.

While I was able to speak with our SME and there was misinformation provided to the

candidate potentially regarding points for that station, they are not experts in exam

administration.

They are there to ensure that the process of the materials and the candidates taking the

exam are provided equitably.

They are not experts in the administration of exams and how points are applied.

Additionally, our exams consistently across all of our exams in the city, critical fails

or critical failures are routinely zero across all of our examinations as it's assessing

the knowledge and skills and abilities and if it was safely completed, the task was safely

completed.

Oh, sorry, miss one part.

So in regards to the appellant statement regarding would they have been promoted, all of our

exam processes and procedures are confidential.

We don't give out scores to our examinations and that's an alignment with civil service

board rule 14.4 around confidentiality of exam materials.

So there's not a way to know in that regard whether or not an appellant would have passed

ahead of time going into an app post in examination until the ranks or failure notices are sent

out.

Okay.

Thank you.

Okay.

Thank you.

Do any members have any questions for staff?

Yes.

Members, time.

Can you tell us the percentage of people that ran into the same issue?

There were just roughly like this examination historically.

I don't have all of the historical data I can speak to this specific exam.

There were 51% of the candidates experienced their critical fail.

And yeah, that was a for no, just for the whole exam, across the entire exam.

So there's multiple stations not specific to this exam station.

Do you know specific to this exam station?

I can look it up.

It'll just take a second.

Okay.

Thank you.

I do have a way to project it so we can all see what they usually do.

One and another in the presentation.

Oh, I'm sorry.

We don't take comments from, you know, if you want to submit a public comment, then there's

the time to do that on the agenda.

And at that time, you can ask.

Yeah.

I'll just go back to the next question.

Is that typical of questions with all exams?

The reason I'm asking is because that seems a pretty low passage rate.

The passage rate for this exam was 46% and that's not necessarily uncommon with a performance

exam of this nature that you would have critical fails at a station.

So you're looking at a situation where life safety or like safety or equipment is in danger.

And so the assessors, and I read through the documentation, deemed a situation was unsafe.

And so that's why the station was stopped.

So they do document as part of it.

And across the entire exam, that documentation was consistent from all of our stations.

Let me pull up.

I don't need the exact number.

Thank you.

That's helpful.

Okay.

Anyone else have any questions for staff?

Yes.

Member, man.

Sorry.

Member, man, for.

Yes.

I just have a few questions.

I know we've been stating.

I just want to know the difference regarding the exercise and the station itself.

So you just stated that based on his inability of, you know, it was identified that there

were critical failure in that specific station.

Let me clarify.

So depending on station and exercise, there's, depending on the exam that's been administered,

sometimes are used interchangeably.

So in this case, I'm going to use station for clarity purposes.

Let's say there were four stations in the exam while they were completing one station.

If they were successful in completing the other three stations, those three stations scores

are still counted.

It would just be the one station in which there was a critical fail that those points would

not be included in the final score.

In the total score.

And for him, it was just that one station.

Correct.

Okay.

The other question is for the assessor or subject matter experts, did they review the

engineer practical examination document?

Are they familiar with it?

Yes.

Because I think you stated that they're not, they're just more or just assessor.

They don't really know how the score works.

So I just want to know if they're familiar with it.

Sure.

Yeah.

They go through a training process at the beginning of the week.

So this is like a week-ish long exam.

And so they go through a thorough training at the beginning of each week, of the week

for training for this specific station.

So they're with this station consistently across all candidates.

And they are one, they're, they're at or above this level of this position.

So they're fully knowledgeable of the position.

And then they also get trained in the specifics of this exercise and like station in regards

to being able to score it.

And once they do observe a failure, do they inform the candidate right then and they

immediately stop?

But as soon as if he completed it and then they informed him that it.

Depending on, I'm just, depending on how the station progresses and depending on the

exercise that's being done without giving exact specifics of this station due to confidentiality,

there can be a time lapse that's allowed to determine if a safe, because like there's,

again, these are practical things that people are doing.

And so there's a time period in which you could correct in action and make it safe.

And they allowed for enough time that at that point they deemed it was necessary to stop

or in the words pause the station in order because at that point it was going to reach

a point of either safety of the equipment or personnel.

And that time lapse is included in the procedure of those exercises.

And it's quantifiable.

I would need to go back and verify.

Okay.

Member Bird.

So I was trying to take down a couple of things that you said and you quoted as if somebody

got a critical fail.

You said you will get a zero for that session, but in this instance you're talking about

the station.

I can.

And maybe I misheard or maybe you mispoke, but I just was trying to figure out and I think

you may have clarified it just now with Commissioner M M for that, you know, there's sort of siloed.

And if, you know, it all goes well, everything else, but in this one place you got a critical

fail, but your points are still being added up cumulatively.

Correct.

So if I'll try to use station going forward.

Depending on our exams, we use station or exercise.

So I apologize if I misspoke.

So if there were five stations and they completed four of the stations, then they only committed

a critical fail at one of those stations, the other four would be counted.

Right.

Okay.

So in this instance, is it the case or do you know if assuming he successfully completed

the other three stations and got the points for those, but did not receive the points

for this one where he received a critical fail, do we know if he would have been eligible

just based on the points he had already accumulated to eligible for the promotion?

That would.

It's not within our process to like administer like the examination process doesn't like the

way we do our scoring is like you critically failed that station, meaning you did something

at that station that was of a nature that you didn't meet the knowledge skills and abilities

of that station.

So the points wouldn't be added.

Like that's not a part of our.

No, I get that for that one station, but I'm wondering if overall, like let's say for

simplicity purposes, you got 25 points per station.

Sure.

And let's say, you know, you fail at one of them.

So you got zero, but you pass the others and you got let's say 20 at each station, of

the other stations.

So you got 60 points total out of 100 would in this similarly, so there would have been

a threshold by which it would have said, oh, at points, you know, if you got 70 points

on this exam total, you pass.

Based on the past point, if they had obtained, they're in theoretically could have passed the

exam and not passed one of the stations.

Yes, if that's what you're asking.

Yes, thank you.

Depending on how stations are weighted and things like that.

Right.

So in this instance, oh, it's not possible to know if he had enough points to have passed

that critical passage point without the.

We have there's confidentiality around exam scores.

Yeah, I don't need to know the exact numbers.

So I just wondering, isn't it possible for you or he to know that the heat, or well,

I guess you, you're not going to tell him what his points were if he failed.

Correct.

Hi, Evan, you have a human resources manager.

If the points that they achieved up until that point were humanively enough to have reached

a past point, they would have passed.

In this particular situation, they didn't achieve enough points on the previous stations.

That is why they were not moved forward in the process.

Right.

I just wanted to clarify that.

And it's a little challenging to identify whether or not they would have passed because

it would have depended upon how many points they would have gotten in that station that

they critically feel.

Understand that.

And I understand that that was an opinion of the appellant that he would have housed.

So I'm not challenging that.

I just was trying to figure out the process by which the points are accumulated, tabulated,

and determined that they met the cutoff for the didn't.

So okay, thank you very much.

And remember Gonzalo's kinetic.

I had the same question to clarify whether this last station was weighted more than the

other stations.

So thank you for clarifying and asking all those questions.

I guess my only question would be then when would Mr. Miek be able to take the exam again?

Recruitments are based on department need.

So it just depends.

This exam has, at times, been done on a two-year cycle, but it's dependent on recruitment

need.

Thank you.

And I have one question.

In terms of that one station, is it fair to say that in the appeal, Mr. Miek did

acknowledge that he did not perform that station correctly?

Correct.

All right.

Any other members have any questions?

Okay.

All right.

Thank you, Mr. Wilson.

Mr. Miek, I saw that you raised your hand.

Did you want to say anything additional?

No.

I'm going to clarify something that they don't think that you care.

Okay.

Sounds good.

Does anyone have any questions or comments or Ks there are motion?

Yes.

I'm very man for motion-waving formal rules and adopting the directest findings in determination

of Mr.

I'm so sorry.

Mr. Kevin Miek's appeal.

There are a second.

Second.

Member, a man for a move.

Member Bird seconded.

Clerk will you please call the roll.

Thank you, Chair.

Commissioners, please unmute for vote.

Commissioner Manfor.

Aye.

Commissioner Bird.

Aye.

Commissioner Gonzalez-Covatic.

Aye.

Commissioner Stein.

Aye.

And Chair Mula.

Aye.

Thank you, motion passes.

Moving on to discussion item number four.

Appeal the disqualification of Stephen Zermeno from the traffic worker one recruitment.

And I'm going to go and order this time.

Is there a staff presentation on this item?

Okay.

Come on up.

And is Mr. Zermono present?

Okay.

Clerk, do we have any members of the public who are to speak on the item?

Thank you, Chair.

We do have one speaker for the item, Shelby.

Okay.

Before we get there, no, come on, sorry, come on back.

And I wanted to go in order.

I just wanted to make sure that the appellant was not here or had submitted public speaker slip.

Does anyone wish to wave the formal presentation of staff in this matter?

Yes.

Okay.

All right.

So it sounds like we don't need a formal presentation.

So just hang on in case we have any questions and we'll take the public comment from Shelby then.

Yes.

So the item that you're speaking on, Shelby, is the appeal of disqualification of Stephen Zermono from the traffic worker one recruitment.

So your comment should pertain to that.

I do.

Okay.

They do.

I'm sure of that.

So as I was listening to the other recruitment engineer and as well as to Stephen, I noticed the point system is unfair and I just agree with it.

And they deserve to have, you know, if it's going to be like that, then they need to work on a lower point system.

So it's not a failure exam process as if, you know, example, if you were leaps certified, you could always, you know, retest or you just passed because leaps certified.

Even without leaps certification disability, because some people don't want to represent or, you know, be like, I might have a disability.

We should give them just the opportunity to give a free retest to three to three times if they failed to exam because we're already in a low economy.

If we don't allow them to, if they fast, you know, fail to pass.

So if he fails, he'll still pass and he gets to keep his points.

Allow him to be like I asked earlier, give him a certification.

Allow failed exams to have more candidates.

And if they fail, they can be seasonal and gets on the job and on site training recipients that allow eligibility to be easier and resource manager to be also involved.

And also add a grant program so that they can be successful, you know, you guys aren't allowing them to be successful.

And it, it shouldn't matter, you know, it's a low economy. Let them retry it just like if the bar exam, you can retest for free because three times because they paid for it.

Give them the chance to be successful. That's all I have to say.

Okay. Thank you.

If we could have, is it Almanza? Is that correct?

Okay. Great. If you could come back up, that would be great.

Does any member have any questions for staff? No. I do have a question for staff.

I noticed that appeal was not included in the packet and that is something that we are asking for, which is the sort of an email to the appellant informing them of today's civil service board meeting.

And I just want to clarify as to whether that did actually go to the appellant.

Yes, I actually have a copy of we sent out the email on the 22nd and the afternoon January 22nd.

I'm going to see a copy. I just want to make sure that it gets sent out.

Does anyone else have any other questions? Okay. Then do I have a motion?

Sure. Motion wave and former rules and adopting the directest findings and determination in regards to Stephen.

Is there main nose for the traffic worker one recruitment?

I'll second. Okay. So motion made by member Amanfor, seconded by member Gonzalez Kabatic. Can the clerk please call the roll.

Thank you. Chair commissioners, please unmute for vote. Commissioner Amanfor.

Aye. Commissioner Bird. Aye. Commissioner Gonzalez Kabatic.

Commissioner Stein. Aye.

And Chair Mule. Aye. Thank you. Motion passes.

Next we will move to the appeal of the disqualification of Samuel Murish from the stage hand one recruitment.

Are there any members of the public who wish to speak on this item?

Thank you, Chair. We do not have any speakers for this item.

Okay. And is Mr. Murish present? No. Okay. And I apologize if I'm mispronouncing anyone's name.

Does anyone wish to have a formal presentation from staff on this particular item? No. Okay.

Then is there, and then I will note for staff, we did say that the appeal will be heard on the January meeting to the appellant, but we don't, we didn't give a specific date.

So I just wanted to, someone to clarify that the specific date of today's date was given to the appellant.

At the time the email is there?

Sorry. Thank you. At the time that email was sent, we didn't have the new 2025 calendar yet, but they were informed on the 22nd of the date time.

Okay. Wonderful. Thank you. Thank you.

All right. And with that, do I have a motion? Motion to wave formal presentation.

Sorry. A motion for the item itself. We don't have to actually move. Okay. Thank you.

To wave formal reading. Motion to wave the rules and adopt the director's recommendation as to Samuel Murish.

Thank you. Do I have a second?

Okay. I moved by member bird and seconded by member of man for clerk. Wait, please call the roll.

Thank you chair commissioners. Please unmute for vote. Commissioner a man for?

Aye. Commissioner bird? Aye. Commissioner Gonzalez-Kabatic? Aye.

Commissioner Stein? Aye.

And Chair Miele? Aye. Thank you. Motion passes.

Okay. And then the last item on the discussion calendar is the appeal of the disqualification of Devonik.

I think hobby from the parking enforcement supervisor recruitment.

Are there any members of the public who wish to speak on this item?

Thank you, Chair. There are no speakers for this item. Okay.

Is a pellant hobby present?

Okay. If so with that does anyone wish to have a formal presentation from staff? No.

Okay. And then if I could just have staff clarify and confirm that because no notification of the appeal was in the packet that a pellant has been notified of today's date.

Yes. The appellant was notified on the 22nd of January via the email that they applied with further application.

Okay. Great. Thank you very much. And with that, if there's no other questions do we have a motion for the item itself?

Motion of wave, the rules and adopted recommendation of the director as to disqualification of Devonik.

I think that's a good question. I think that's a good question.

I think that's a good question. I think that's a good question.

I think that's a good question. I think that's a good question.

I think that's a good question.

I think that's a good question.

I think that's a good question.

I think that's a good question.

I think that's a good question.

I think that's a good question.

I think that's a good question.

I think that's a good question.

Okay. And with that, at 147, we will adjourn to closed session.

Thank you, Chair. We're ready when you are.

Okay. Great. So we were returning from closed session at 2.26 p.m.

and we're going to table the closed session item item number 7 till the next civil service board meeting.

And then moving on, member comments, ideas and questions.

Are there any member comments, ideas or questions?

Seeing none, are there any public comments matters not on the agenda?

Thank you, Chair. There are no speakers for not on the agenda.

And with that, I'll adjourn the meeting at 2.26 p.m.

All right. Oh, thank you very much.

Thank you.