Ready to begin.

All right, thank you, Brandon.

Um, welcome to the civil service commission meeting.

I am Commissioner President Nico Potillo.

We're going to do a roll call to confirm Commissioner Attendance.

We're going to call your name, please say present, Commissioner Freeman.

Uh she is going to be out on, she'll be here in a few minutes as I understand.

Uh Commissioner Merrill.

Present.

Commissioner Moore, present.

Commissioner Fan is absent.

Uh also joining us today.

Our personnel director, David Dallagar, assistant to the personnel director, no assistant personnel director and senior deputy city attorney David Carlin, and assistant to the personnel director, Sakha.

There are 11 items on this afternoon's closed session agenda.

Um the uh public appointed first is um the public employment appeal of equipment twelve disqualification pursued to code section 5457.

Okay, um is uh don't we have done all that with the door?

Yeah the door should be open, yeah.

Okay, we're gonna have to redo that.

Okay, so unfortunately you have to read it all uh I got data information attracted by some yes okay all that list all right document I'm not sure 100% sure which right now I would like the research there to get back um I would assume the opponent submitted this for consideration okay yeah well in that case fine all right so I can know I was wondering why Dylan wasn't here okay well to the civil service commission meeting I am Commissioner President Nico Portillo we are going to do a quick roll call to confirm commissioner attendance when I call your name Clease say present Commissioner Freeman Commissioner Merrill President Commissioner Moore Present Commissioner Fan is absent thank you also joining us today our personnel director David Dallagar assistant personnel director and Mayton Aban Senior Deputy City Attorney David Carlin and assistant to the personnel director Sabat McNeil.

There are 11 items on this afternoon's um closed session agenda um including public appointment appeal disqualification pursuant to California Government Code Section 5495 and that go all the way back to okay Armando A.

Mill Prawn appealing their conviction record disqualification for the position of head and drunk trial two masilla appealing their conviction record disqualification for the position of the two says Montana Junior appealing their record disqualification for the position of the laboratory Francisco Jorda Junior appealing their conviction record disqualification for the position of the chill number two Daniel and Web filling their conviction record disqualification for the position to be tilling two and Williamson filling their conviction record for the disqualification for the position sanitation driver trainee and Tracy A.

Simpson Hayes appealing for the federal disqualification for the position laborer and we have public employment appeal to disciplinary appeals pursuant to the California government code section 50951 2024 2 appealing or suspension for the position of police officer 2 um 2025 one appealing their suspension and disciplinary transfer from the position of police officer two uh Stephen Glover appealing their termination from the position of sanitation director two appealing their termination from the position of associates department in the resource panelists.

Is there anyone wanting to make a public comment on an item in the closed session agenda?

We will take in Chris's public comment first, no, and then on um is no public comments on the okay.

We now will adjourn the public session and go into closed session, the regular business meeting meeting at 1 p.m.

Go ahead and call to order.

Yes, okay.

Welcome to the Temple Terminal Commission meeting.

I am Commission President CEO.

We are going to the roll call to prefer commissioner attendance.

We're going to call your name PC present.

Commissioner Freeman.

Present.

Commissioner Merrill.

Present.

Commissioner Moore.

Commissioner Fan is absent.

Thank you for your attendance.

Your attendance have been noticed.

Also joining us today a person now, Director David Dallagar, assistant personnel director, and Navy Lion.

Senior Deputy City Attorney David Carnett and assistant to the personnel director, Sal Mill.

Item two is on the agenda and election of officers.

Oh am I replied.

You read the minutes.

You've got you've got elected.

Okay.

Item two is a report for closed session.

I'll call on Sabbath.

Go ahead, Salah.

Public employment, appeal of employment disqualifications for Simon California government code section 549-571.

Number one, Armando A.

Beltron, appealing their conviction record disqualification for the position of heavy truck driver two.

Motion to grant the appeal passed four to zero with Commissioner Fan absent.

Number two, Massia Petter, appealing their conviction record disqualification for the position of utility worker two.

Motion to grant the appeal cost four to zero.

Commissioner Fan was absent.

Number three, Cesar Montano Junior, appealing their conviction record disqualification for the position of laborer.

Motion to grant the appeal passed four to zero.

Commissioner Fan was absent.

Number four, Francisco J.

Mota Jr.

appealing their conviction record disqualification for the position of utility worker two.

Motion to deny the appeal passed four to zero.

Commissioner Fan was absent.

Number five, Daniel and Webb appearing their conviction record disqualification for the position of utility worker two.

Motion to deny the appeal passed three to one with Commissioner Merrill voting no.

Number six, uh Commissioner Fan was absent.

Thank you.

Number six, Dialatia M.

Williamson appealing their conviction record disqualification for the position of sanitation driver trainee.

Motion to deny the appeal cost four to zero and includes the applicant being unable to compete in any examinations for city employment for three years.

Commissioner Fan was absent.

Number seven, Tracy A.

Simpson Hayes appealing their medical disqualification for the position of labor.

Motion to deny the appeal cost three to one with Commissioner Merrill voting no.

Commissioner Fan was absent.

Public employment appeal disciplinary appeals for students of California government code section 54957B1.

Number eight, 2024-2, appealing their suspension from the position of police officer two trail to the next meeting.

For nine, 2025-1, appealing their suspension and disciplinary transfer from the position of police officer two.

Motion to uphold the suspension and disciplinary transfer passed 4-0.

Commissioner Fan was absent.

Number 10, Stephen Glover appealing their termination from the position of sanitation driver two has been trailed to the next meeting.

Number 11, Derek Whitlock appealing their termination from the position of associate department human resources analyst.

Motion to uphold the termination fields two to two of Commissioner Merrill and Commissioner Freeman voting no.

Commissioner Fan was absent.

This item will be trailed to the next meeting.

We will now move on to non-end public approval.

Is there anyone who wishes to make a public comment on an item not on the agenda?

No public.

Okay, we'll move on to the consent agenda.

We would like any who would anyone like to make a motion to approve your consent agenda items three through ten, which includes the minutes from December 4th, 2025, the minutes from the December 20, December 4th, 2025 commitment.

Um we had a request um from SD.

Yeah, to remove item number four.

So uh we will the consent agenda.

I'll move the consent agenda with the exception of item number four, which has been withdrawn.

Okay, we have a motion to the second.

We'll go ahead and vote.

Commissioner Freeman.

Yes, Commissioner Mayor, yes, Commissioner Moore, yes, and I am a yes.

The motion passes unanimously.

25 commit the uh we had a request um from SD to remove item number four so uh we will the consent agenda I'll move the consent agenda with the exception of item number four which has been withdrawn second okay we have a motion to the second we'll go ahead and vote commissioner freeman yes commissioner mayor yes commissioner more yes and I am a yes the motion passes unanimously um go ahead and move on to our discussion I don't know you just have one right yeah withdrawing oh twelve eleven okay yeah go ahead uh good afternoon commissioners carissa rosemore for staff item 11 is a request from Brandon Howard Senior Wastewater Operations Supervisor for a two month specially without pay ending March 6 2026 with his job to be saved Mr.

Howard is requesting this leave for outside employment the public utilities department recommends modification of this request to name on an eligible list mr howard has been employed with the city since December 13th 2021 his most recent performance evaluation was meet standards mr howard mayor may not be present on zoom today however the department is present to answer any questions you may have is uh mr howard here mr howard if you're here on zoom can you please raise your hand to identify yourself if you're a call in number you can press star six to raise your hand i see no one is raising their hand okay um thank you um so i'll go ahead and make a motion to um just a quick okay go ahead just put discussion this is just till mark six two thousand six right um yeah yeah like twenty four days from now yeah um so I'd be inclined to just have a job to be saved there's not a lot of context here which brings up in context just show up long enough to see who's these new job are crazy um and if he wants to come back so uh which if it was a year I'd say absolutely not but um two months which has already elapsed then I think it's fine so I'll make a motion to uh grant the special leave uh two month specialty without paying and think March 6th 2026 the job you say if we have public comment oh do we have the public yeah I'll withdraw the vote Tim Carroll Deputy Director of Public Department um just want to give some context on the on the decision to move it to name on list um we currently have an eligibility list for senior wastewater operations supervisor um because this was for outside employment um and MBC is such a critical facility it's a 247 operator facility um that's in the middle of commissioning new processes for the pure water project um we just felt like it was a very critical juncture at that uh facility and at this time and we would move to to fill that position quickly are you are you in the process of filling that is no because we're formating this decision so this decision would would basically like we'll have 20 extra days that we could just to hire somebody if if it doesn't go to our states we could get that process started started today today yes okay instead of waiting to process which would we would then have to start the process and we'd be that much further behind okay if it for the commission's knowledge the fifth is the next of the service commission I would think I would think I would basically meant move to still I'm to some extent the not here which kind of indicates priority right um we might be a job that we like um pretty so I think I'm still at the it's only 20 something days away by the fifth he would have had to submit some other paperwork or we would know at least if there was an interest of trying to extend this you would technically be on leave with job saves so you would not have to yeah it wouldn't be another right we wouldn't be back with it we shouldn't have seven five um move to approve job save saved uh you want to get started on the process right away right yeah our operations positions are critical positions though we move as quickly as possible and when is that time uh in july we have a motion motion approve job save a second second all right we have a motion to second um go ahead and vote commissioner freeman yes yes a to two two so yeah yes

Yeah, our operations positions are critical positions, so we move as quickly as possible to fill.

So when it's fine uh in July.

All right, we have a motion to execute.

Um go ahead and vote, Commissioner Freeman.

Yes.

Yes.

A to two, too.

So yeah, yes.

Okay.

And I have a no.

So the match the motion present.

Um three to one.

Very good.

All right.

Um that piece.

Good afternoon, commissioners.

Jennifer Lamas Via Nueva with staff.

Item 12, it's a proposed salary review schedule for fiscal year 2028.

For city charter section 130, it shall be the duty of the Civil Service Commission to prepare and furnish to the council a report identifying classifications that warrant special salary consideration due to recruitment or retention problems, significant change in duties or responsibilities, or other special factors deemed appropriate by the commission.

Included in your packet for your review and approval is a proposed salary review schedule, which outlines the key steps and dates to be followed for the upcoming fiscal year 2028 salary review process.

Also included is a form to be used by departments and recognized employee organizations when submitting their salary proposals and available to answer any questions.

Thank you.

Uh any public comments.

The public comment on Zoom.

Discussion for any.

Yeah, we've been this is going pretty well.

Okay, wanna approve and do approving schedule.

Okay.

Yeah, yeah.

All right.

I moved to approve schedule.

Second.

Um we have a motion of seconds.

Go ahead and vote, Commissioner Freeman.

Yeah.

Commissioner Merrill.

Yes.

Commissioner Moore.

Yes.

I am a yes.

Uh correctly.

Thank you.

Good afternoon.

I'm Abby Geraldsa.

I'm the deputy director of the human resources department.

Um, we're here today to go over the investigatory interview process versus the fact finding and um interview process as requested by Commissioner Merrill, and to answer any questions that you have.

Um, I do understand that the personnel department gave you copies of the quick guide that we've put together, which is a resource guide to um reflect what the language of the MOU has clarified um during the last round of negotiations.

We update it regularly, it's a resource tool, but the information um that this follows is based on the language in the memory memorandum of understanding for the recognizing organizations.

This does not apply to our local 145 folks or our POA folks because they're covered under FOBAR and FOBAR, and there's specific requirements under those two provisions.

Um, and so just wanted to kind of go through that and mostly answer your your questions you might have had, Commissioner Merrill to you.

Um, but what is the difference between the two?

We get that question a lot.

What's the difference between a fact-finding investigation and an investigatory interview or a supervisor's investigatory interview?

Well, essentially that what you're looking for is the same thing, it's an investigation to determine if there's misconduct a violation of a city policy or procedure.

That's the same for everything.

Um the type of the information that's evaluated is still the same as well.

It really comes down to the difference is the number of the parties involved and who leads that investigation or that process.

So for a fact finding, it's usually a panel of individuals, two to three, and it's not in the same chain of command as that individual subject or subjects.

While the investigatory interview on the other side, it's meant to be informal and meant to cover issues quickly.

So it's usually the direct supervisor or a supervisor in the chain of command of that individual, and the witnesses are zero to two.

We tried it, most of these circumstances where it's an investigatory interview with the supervisor.

It's usually the supervisor has witnessed it directly, or there's information factually to support that, where we want to give the employee notice of rights to representation, ask the questions, get the issue redressed as quickly as possible.

That's where there's one direct subject, the supervisor's involvement or the chain of command.

So that's really the distinction.

The rest of the language, um, in the last round of negotiations that we had with our um REOs, we did clarify that the fact-finding process for both the fact finding and investigatory interview, the information is going to be shared the same way with regard to the copies being provided of the questions and the way that reports are being provided.

Um so this is an ongoing document.

We update it regularly.

We are in contract negotiation.

So if there's any changes as a result of that, this would also be updated again too.

So with that, I will turn it over to any questions and happy to address.

Okay, yes.

Thank you for being here.

Absolutely, good to see you.

Uh one point of clarification I needed was for uh like with backbinding, the appointment authority normally initiates it, right?

And maybe you've got to get to somebody else to be a chair of person in a panelist form with what investigator interview, the supervisor, the supervisor can initiate that themselves.

Correct.

Not an appointing authority, but two buyers can at any level.

Correct.

Okay.

And then and sorry, just to clarify, that's consistent with the direction that we get for training.

If a supervisor directly went into something, they can take immediate action to do that.

But if there's some clarification that's needed or they saw part of it, but they want to have a conversation with the employee, since that conversation could lead to discipline, that's why the investigatory interview with the supervisor makes sense to give them representation because that conversation could lead to discipline.

Okay.

That's the right, because I've got the supervisor, they could just, if they win it's something they could just go ahead and get discipline right there and if they see it 100% with no questions, absolutely.

If there's any question, then they can have this informal investigation.

Okay.

One thing that moved me up a little bit was that the language says that this investigatory uh interview is for conduct, only this one, not for performance.

No, it's not related for performance.

Okay, that's what I was concerned about.

I saw some in the past where I think they use it was used for uh performance.

That's in fact.

Well, when the discipline, when the discipline document is provided, other issues that might be involved in that is reported out, but what the investigation is looking for is not on performance.

Now there is some gray area because sometimes performance and misconduct overlap, and so that might be why you might have seen some reference to that in the past.

Okay.

That's what yeah.

This the second box here, we have different notes as far as investigatory interview with says that you can this is um the supervisor may meet with an employee at any time to ask which you questions regarding the job performance.

That's not conduct, which is so that's what's going on, also.

Yeah, so we get this question a lot, and that's why we wanted to put it on here specifically.

You do not get rights to representation as an employee if your supervisor just wants to talk to you about your daily responsibilities or about operational, right?

So we get the question of is that going into the realm of potentially needing representation or potential discipline?

So we wanted to clarify that because we get that question a lot.

So that's the purpose of adding that note to reflect that for clarity for departments.

So do you have the do you have to formally state to the employer that this is a fact-finding or investigatory meeting?

Yeah, so if it is truly an investigatory interview, not having a conversation about just daily responsibilities, tasks, assignments, and the like, they get notice and rights representation because the supervisor has knowledge that their conversation could or potentially lead to discipline, and they're entitled to that representation.

And so if it is an investigative investigatory interview, um, and something is mentioned, is that something that could be green or I might misunderstand your question.

If it's an investigatory interview, anything that's discussed in that interview can be used for disciplinary purposes.

Okay.

Um at that point, if it is, um at that point if it is, then does that with the employee moving to have saying now I have the right to make my uh representation of it by REO?

So it's based, it's a twofold process.

Rights representation belongs to the employee, but if the supervisor has knowledge that their conversation could lead to discipline, we train and direct supervisors that they should give representation before the conversation begins.

Okay.

If they're in a conversation with their employees and an employee shares something that could potentially lead to discipline, we tell supervisors stop the conversation, tell them you'll get back to them and give them proper rights to representation to then further engage in that conversation.

We do have the ability for an employee to waive their rights.

We have a document an employee can sign to say, I just want to talk to you about this, I want to waive my rights and continue the conversation.

They can do that.

So it depends on the flow of the conversation, but it's based on what you know at the time when you start that conversation.

So and my other thing is if the employee feels that this is uh uh gonna lead to discipline.

Um, are they and it is assured by the supervisor that it's not, but they feel uh did that employee have the right to uh terminate the conversation.

They do, and and we do have a lot of employees that do that.

Like I'm afraid that this because the employee might not still know something that we don't, right?

As for the supervisor engaging in the conversation, so the employee does have a right to say, I feel like this conversation may lead to discipline, so I'd like to have rights to representation.

Absolutely.

Okay, and that will that will not like that will not be recorded in any type of performance evaluation.

No, it the employee cannot be retaliated against or did discriminated or harassed against for their engaging their rights to representation appropriately.

Okay.

Thank you for your answers to my questions.

Great.

Any other questions?

Okay, well, thank you so much for having us.

We appreciate it.

Anything else in the future, please let us know.

Thank you, take care.

Thank you.

Afternoon, uh, Carissa Rose more for staff.

Item 14 is an information item only.

This is an annual report submitted to the commission on limited appointments, restricted appointments, and special shift differential positions for the calendar year.

When it is necessary to fill a position of limited duration, the personnel director may approve a limited appointment from the appropriate eligible list.

Positions filled on a limited basis could be due to grant funded positions or to replace sick, injured, and leave of absence employees.

Employees hired in limited positions do not serve a probationary period.

The services of a limited appointee may be terminated at any time, and such action is not subject to review by the commission.

Calendar year 2025 had a total of 1,234 limited appointments identified.

There were no restricted appointments, and there were no shift differential positions identified.

I'm available to answer any questions you may have.

Do we know those that just count not specific qualifications but count of those that we're going to fund it?

No, I do not.

Yeah, I can get that if you want.

Thank you.

Any more questions?

Thank you.

All right, 18.

Good afternoon, Commissioners Darren for staff.

Item 15 is a request from Commissioner Merrill for an update on the Civil Service Commission EEO report.

The Equal Employment Opportunity Program was developed by the City Council in 1991.

As a result of this program, the Civil Service Commission directed staff to provide regular equal employment opportunity reports.

The 2024 Equal Opportunity Report was presented at the September 4th, 2025 CSC meeting and contained tables with reference to the county labor force availability and city population availability.

At the December 4th meeting, Commissioner Merrill requested an update on this on the commission on the Civil Service Commission equal opportunity report and notices sent to the departments.

After the presentation of the EEO reports of the Civil Service Commission, the personnel department sends memos to the individual departments with their breakdowns.

This memo is informational and is intended to present the department.

I'm sorry, it's intended to present department directors with a moment in time snapshot of their department demographics for their awareness.

Departments are encouraged to reach out for assistance and how areas of underrepresentation can be addressed or steps that they can take to ensure a fair and equitable hiring process.

This year we were very fortunate to be partnering with the division of race and equity to help ensure the city improve community representation in the city workforce.

We included a list of the division of race and equity department liaisons with our memo for departments reference.

The division of race and equity provides equity-centered coaching to support departments and yield equitable outcomes that include the tactical equity plan strategies, which was part of the budget process.

Departments who wish to access the ECC services can reach out to their department's assigned DRA coach directly, and they will be able to assist them.

In the future, we are looking forward to finding areas to work with and coordinate with the division of race and equity to help moving forward towards the goal of a workforce that is representative of the community they serve.

Happy to answer any additional questions that you may have.

What I was trying to do ultimately was just trying to see if there's any progress being made in the effort of the support of diversity inclusion throughout the city workforce.

And I read I read the memo that you sent out every year.

And it said that you guys send these memory city departments where they have areas of representation.

Yes.

So my question was like which departments did they go to.

Okay, I can get through a list of the departments.

Yeah, okay.

And then in the past, have they reached out to you that you guys offer to get some help?

We have areas.

Yes, we have had contact with uh a couple of departments in the past, and we this memo was sent out about a month ago, and we have kind of had contact with two departments at this point.

Okay, so it is not it's not frequently that we get departments uh contacting us.

We do um in general have services that we offer departments.

Uh we have trainings for uh appointing authority interview trainings, which help uh ensure that the process is at least fair and equitable.

Um, our goal with the department is to ensure that the applicant pool is sufficiently diverse to ensure a diverse outcome.

So without too heavy a hand, we try to train the departments, ensure that our lists that we're providing them are diverse and representative of the department of the city, and then um we assist them in any way that we can to help that.

Okay, yeah, I was trying to get a sense of if the departments are taking advantage of this uh of the help that you're trying to offer in these areas that you guys pointed out.

The data showed that the areas of representation, right?

Yeah, someone in and pass, have anybody reached out to you and if they have an understanding.

Yeah, again, you don't have the answer to all that way they don't do it, but yes, I yeah, I mean it it again it is informational to them.

So the idea is that they are aware and are addressing those issues going forward.

Um, and that's kind of where we step in with our trainings.

Um ideally, this go going forward.

Um, the department or division of race and equity will be able to provide more hands-on direction for them.

Um, we still have our uh appointing authority interview process, which they still have to follow with our um the diverse panel with a number of members.

Uh so there is that portion that we oversee, but yes, it's not um, it's kind of difficult to address one for one which position is where the underrepresentation is, but again, our goal as a department is to make sure that the applicant pool we're providing is diverse and representative of the community.

Hopefully, the next one.

Yeah, yeah, I understand.

Yeah, I understand the solutions you guys are in also.

I know it's hard for accountability.

How can you hold the departments accountable if you're trying to with the data?

Are you saying, hey, you guys are underrepresented in these third areas, and whatever site you guys maybe know David, I guess you can't you guys can't hold any departments accountable, but you can just add I guess just given information.

That's what I mean.

Correct, and legally you can't do anything either.

You have to pick the best person for the job.

One of the things that you know, Commissioner Freeman and I've been talking about, I've been talking about for the last year is we lost our recruiting team, right?

That was a big deal to us because we were able to send that team out to all the communities, not just downtown, but all of them, and really what we saw is a pump of the numbers in historically underrepresented communities, whether up north in RB or the promise, right?

We we saw this dramatic increase there.

So that's what we're doing on our end, or we're doing on our end.

We're still continuing to get out there to inform and educate.

Um, but those are kind of the steps we've been taking.

I will say I am I have a meeting scheduled with Kim, who's the deputy director of DRE, the division of race and equity.

I believe next week.

So I'm gonna be working with her on the data so she has some connections to Harvard and some other higher institute learning institutions, and she's gonna help us take a deep dive into our data to see what we are doing, what works, what doesn't work, where we're hitting the goals just from our end on a higher overall citywide process, not just so we're not just only setting out to the departments individually, we're also looking for things.

I suppose the data will indicate whether there's any progress being made or not.

Correct, and we saw some amazing progress with our recruiting team.

I I'll give you a quick example.

This is from last year.

Uh we took a look at the promise zone, uh, the largest areas of code in the promise zone, which houses D4, D8, and D9.

And what we found is their applicants went up over the course of three years by 300%.

What we found also was the relative increase in city applications went up by 200%.

So what we feel that shows is as we get out to the community, there's more engagement and more people apply, and there's almost a one-for-one return, uh, a percentage basis, anyways.

The more people who apply from a community end up getting jobs, almost one for one.

And we saw that same thing happen up north in RV, which is historically underrepresented um population working in the city as well.

And we saw their numbers went up by 270%, when again the rest of the city went up by 200%.

So to us, and this is where we're gonna have Kim and Harvard help us dive into is when we're going out to the communities and the every single library, every single rec center in every community.

It appears that it's pumping up the numbers and evening it out and bringing it more towards the average number of citizens in that area, which then when you have the average number of citizens in each zip code applying, you tend to have that represent be represented in the city.

So those are kind of the bigger picture things we're doing, in addition to what Darren's doing with Dre on that end, um trying to make sure our data is good and also make the case to bring back um our recruiting team, and you know, this was yes, a very important part of what we do.

Appreciate Jeffers, appreciate the uh responses.

Thank you.

Well, I will say this in talking to uh Miss Desmond.

I did mention that I do believe at least one commissioner, maybe multiple, would like to be included in that process.

So obviously, I'll let everybody here know, and less than a quorum, but see if we can get you guys involved as well.

Yeah, because I'm not sure AAIT is really the goal, and I think for me, I wouldn't I appreciate knowing or being aware of a post-collaboration of race and equity, but having the departments, I think, accountability, even if it's active acknowledgement.

So I appreciate that the email or the memo said we encourage you, but some type of respond to this by like, do you plan to work with equity you know, race and equity on a strategy?

They can say no, but that's the accountability.

We don't have to go into the weeds of their strategy and all that.

We can let race and equity do that, but that accountability of do you intend in this fiscal year to address this, you know, and partner with race and equity, something to where we acknowledge that we have an active acknowledgement from them.

Got it, I see the data.

Wow, my numbers are low.

Too busy for that.

Like some type of that is what I would like to possibly feel on the future on future reports, kind of how you said there's only two departments that have engaged.

Everyone's busy, and we're all doing a lot, right?

So not it doesn't mean that they don't mean well and don't plan to, but I think it's important enough for us to represent the I'm I'm a community member of B4.

Um, I want to know that my community is being represented.

I want to know all communities are being represented.

Those statistics and those numbers are remarkable, and I'm an absolute champion for our recruitment team for various reasons.

But I know personnel does great work.

Um, and this is where they accountate on the departments to at least acknowledge the intent for that fiscal year, you know, budget changes, all plans and everything, that aside, acknowledging that they got it.

Yeah, and that we're even dealing with the primary the right person to talk to because we sent it all to the appointing authorities.

That may not be who's on that task.

What's in their email or it's in their box, but if the DDEs or if there's other someone else advising any panelists that's gonna address that, who is that main person that we should be talking to and making sure that we can capture that on the reports, and just to clarify the departments have acknowledged receipt.

Uh, only two have reached out for some uh guidance or at this point, and I think that's partially due to the budget situation where nobody's really hiring currently, but it is something that we can include in our next when we're sending out the next report, which will be coming up soon again.

Uh, we can include that language in that memo.

Yeah, because we can take.

Yeah, yeah.

Um, do you plan on doing it?

Uh if so, or let us know by this date.

Yeah, yeah.

By this date, you can let us know if you'll have time this fiscal year, or what quarter did you intend to address something to where we can go, okay?

We're not worried about PEV, just pick on them, not it's not that they're an issue.

If they say we're not gonna do anything until third quarter, it's done because otherwise this conversation is not gonna come back up until we get the next report, and we're still in this part, we're still in the same place.

We're still in the same place.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

All right, we'll go up with well.

Good afternoon, Commissioners.

David Alleght's staff.

Item 16 is a request for me to update the commission on various personnel department related items.

Today I'll be providing an update on the personnel department's new applicant tracking system contract, along with an overview of the new system modules that will significantly enhance the city's hiring, onboarding, and workforce planning processes.

On December 10th, 2024, the city issued requests for proposal for a recruitment and applicant tracking services.

Following a competitive procurement process, governmentjobs.com, also known as NeoGov, was selected as a successful vendor.

The contract was subsequently approved by the city council on February 2nd of this year.

NeoGov is currently used citywide to support recruitment and applicant tracking for classified positions, including recruitment postings, applicant screening, and referral lists.

The city's existing contract with NeoGov is set to expire March 31st, 2026 to ensure continuity of operations and avoid disruptions to critical hiring functions.

The city will enter into the new NeoGo contract April 1st of this year as well.

This agreement, so the next step, the very next step.

This agreement will be for an initial five-year term with five additional one-year options to review.

In addition to continuing our existing applicate tracking services, the new contract expands the city's use of NeoGov by adding two key modules called onboard and attract.

NeoGov onboard module will significantly improve the onboarding experience for classified employees.

This module digitizes online workflows by automating paperwork, routing forms electronically, and providing a centralized portal for new employees.

New hires will have 24-7 access to onboarding materials, including required forms, and benefit information.

And we'll be able to complete and electronically signals as the W4s, I9s, and Direct Deposit Forums prior to the first day using either a computer or mobile device.

The onboarding module also integrates with the verify to confirm work eligibility and syncs with insight how to populate onboarding forms with applicant data, reducing duplication and manual entry.

It allows completed paperwork to be instantly routed to the appropriate departments, triggering notifications, for example, to IT for quick consent.

And ensuring downstream tasks are initiated without the limit.

This system maintains audit trails, digital signatures, and timestamp documents and provides dashboards that allow personnel and departments to monitor onboarding progress by employment these for the departments.

And it will export reports in Excel or other forms as well.

Importantly, the module also includes a pre-hire portal that allows departments to assign tasks and checklist candidates who have accepted a conditional offer but are still completing pre-employment requirements.

The new contract also includes the track module, which integrates with Insight and functions as a candidate relationship management tool.

A track allows the city to proactively engage with potential candidates, track candidate sources, manage leads, and build talent pipelines for future higher fees.

Through this integration with governmentjobs.com, which is the primary public sector job board, reaching more than three million job seekers.

The module automates candidate outreach and expands the city's recruitment.

Attract supports personalized both email campaigns, automated notifications to qualify candidates with new positions matching their school where posted, uh this all through their virtual recruiter feature, and recruitment reporting that helps identify which outreach strategies and recruitment sources build the strongest candidates.

The module can also be used to create branded landing pages and custom online forums for job fairs and recruitment events, enabling the city to collect candidate information real time.

Taken together the continued use of NeoGov in addition to the onboarding and track modules will allow the city to modernize its recruitment and onboarding processes, improve the candidate and employee experience, strengthen compliance and auditability, and better position the city to compete for talent and challenging label.

We look forward to implementing these enhancements, and I will give you updates as we go along.

With that, I'm happy to answer any questions or hear any comments.

So Monday we got it approved by council.

There's 30-day recommendation period after it's heard of the second hearing.

Soon is there a notification of delay?

So I'm the department HR person with my appointing authority.

Will they have roles set up in the system that if I'm at the reason for the delay, you're made aware as the appointing authority?

Yes, they will have vision on the whole process.

They will be able to run reports, but they will also be able to go into the dashboard and see where their people are, where they're stuck in what step, if they've even done what they're supposed to do.

So that's that's them that's us hope being hopeful that they're proactive and looking.

Can we trigger the system where that notifications go like I'm getting a notification that I'm 30 days late, but my boss knows that I'm 45 days, or maybe they get the same 30 days.

That's something to where it's not just on my email that I'm behind, and then I may not take the time to go look in that portal.

How are we?

Because I guess this is triggered from is this going to save us any time in the numbers that we have to report to the council, how long it's taking us to hire, if not.

Sure.

So the bad answer to that is I don't know.

Right?

But we will be able to run reports.

We will absolutely have visibility, and so what we can do with those reports if they aren't automated, uh or you know, automatically set to a higher level of running three of the department, is we can work with our partners at HR and send them the reports they through the audit are supposed to be monitoring and tracking the dashboard and holding the departments accountable following through our steps.

Because I think this is a great for employees and for tenants, but it also means it's up to the correct that we may need an answer to.

Yeah.

All right, any more questions?

Next meeting is March 5th.