Laserfiche WebLink
BUSINESS CALENDAR <br /> 3. Discuss the Personnel Board scheduling for Case 2022-02. <br /> Minutes: Both the City's and the Appellant's attorneys acknowledged reading the <br /> Personnel Board rules. The parties discussed the timeline and expressed their concerns <br /> regarding the scheduling of Case 2022-02 and a//other pending Personnel Board cases. <br /> Legal Advisor Bums clarified that the current meeting is the Personnel Board Rule 2.4 <br /> meeting for Case 2022-02. The City acknowledged this and indicated a willingness to <br /> proceed with scheduling the hearing if the Appellant's attorney and his client were ready. <br /> The Appellant's attorney stated their client is currently medically unavailable to attend, but <br /> was open to scheduling a future prehearing date. Appellant's attorney noted that his client is <br /> unable to sit for extended periods due to medical reasons. The City's attorney objected to <br /> Appellant's assertion that he is unable to attend the hearing due to medical reasons and <br /> offered for Appellant to attend the hearing virtually. <br /> Vice Chair Crockett inquired whether other cases could proceed, given the Appellant's <br /> attorney's representation that their client is unable to attend the hearing either virtually or in- <br /> person. The City requested a medical document from the Appellant's physician confirming <br /> their unavailability for both in-person and virtual meetings. Vice Chair Crockett expressed <br /> that he would like to move quickly and efficiently, and asked to hear the City's position <br /> regarding moving forward with Case No. 2022-04 prior to Case No. 2022-02. The City <br /> objected to proceeding with another case until a medical document from Appellant's <br /> physician is provided. Vice Chair Crockett asked for input from the other Board members. <br /> Board Member Hernandez-Castillo supported postponing Case 2022-02 and proceeding <br /> with Case No. 2022-04 before Case No. 2022-02. She noted that since the Board has <br /> generally heard cases in-person, it should continue to do so. Board Member Ballinas <br /> agreed with Board Member Hernandez-Castillo and believed proceeding even with a <br /> medical clearance from the Appellant in Case No. 2022-02 could create further <br /> complications. Board Member Rivera agreed with the previous two statements. The Board <br /> declined to seek medical documentation from the Appellant. <br /> With the consensus from the Board to proceed with Case No. 2022-04 before 2022-02, <br /> Legal Advisor Bums advised that the Personnel Board Rule 2.4 meeting for Case 2022-04 <br /> would be added to the agenda for the next meeting. After consultation with the parties and <br /> the Board as to availability, it was determined to hold a special meeting for June 25 at 6:30 <br /> p.m. for the Personnel Board Rule 2.4 meeting for Case No. 2022-.04. The Secretary <br /> noted that the Board now meets regularly on the 2nd and 4th Thursdays of each month, <br /> with meetings starting at 6:b0 p.m. to maximize available time. <br /> Vice Chair Crockett encouraged all parties to review the Personnel Board rules prior to the <br /> next meeting. <br /> Per correspondence dated April 4, 2025, the City noted for the record that the Appellant <br /> Personnel Board 3 5/28/2025 <br />