Loading...
CR2002-041 Ord 868 Police Review Committee . . March 19, 2002 Council Report 2002-41 First Reading of Ordinance 2002-868 - Police Review Committee Proposed Action Staff recommends adoption of the following motion: Approve Ordinance 2002-868 for first reading and approve Resolution 2002-22 for first reading. This action will continue the process of replacing the Police Civil Service Commission with the Police Review Committee. Overview The City Charter is being amended to create a Police Review Committee to replace the Police Civil Service Commission as an alternative review of disciplinary actions in the Police Department. Ordinance 2002-868 defines the duties of the Committee and establishes the actual procedures that will be used in the event that it is asked to review a disciplinary action. Resolution 2002~22 officially abolishes the Police Civil Service Commission. The ordinance and the resolution will lake effect on the same date. . Primary Issues to Consider · Why should a Police Review Committee replace the Police Civil Service Commission? Supportin2 Information . Ordinance 2002-868 . Resolution 2002-22 '- , ( , I , ( . -- -" ~t. (. , L- ~ _ . l 't James Genellic Assistant City Manager ~inanCial Impact: $ . Budgeted: YIN SouTce: I Related Documents (eJP, ERP, etc.): Notes: ~~ . COllncil Report 2002-41 . Page 2 Analvsis of the Issues Why should a Police Review Committee replace the Police Civil Service Commission? Timelines added to the hiring process by the requirements of the Civil Service Commission place the Police Department at a competitive disadvantage when recruiting quality candidates for open positions. The Civil Service Code was established over 60 years ago to provide control and supervision over the hiring, promotion, discipline, and discharge processes involving employees of the Police Department In recent years the duties of the Civil Service Commission have been duplicated by other city, state, and federal mles. The Commission no longer conducts hiring or promotional testing but simply approves the process designed by department staff. The new police review committee will only act as an alternative venue for the review of disciplinary actions in the Police Department. It will not be involved in the hiring process. Alternatives . 1. Approve Ordinance 2002-868 and Resolution 2002-22 for first reading. 2. Do not approve Ordinance 2002-868 and Resolution 2002-22 for first reading. 3. Continue for additional information. Staff recommends Altemative #1. . .- . CITY OF HOPKINS Hennepin County, Minnesota ORDINANCE 2002-868 AN ORDINANCE FOR THE PURPOSE OF REPEALING HOPKINS CITY CODE SECTION 320.01 ET SEQ. AND IN ITS PLACE EST ABLISHING THE PROCEDURES AND STANDARDS FOR TH E OPERATION OF A POLICE DEPARTMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE TO PROVIDE AN ALTERNATIVE APPEAL PROCESS OF DISCHARGE OR DISCIPLINARY DECISIONS INVOLVING HOPKINS POLICE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEES. THE CITY C01JNCIL OF THE CITY OF HOPKINS HEREBY ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: HOPKINS CITY CODE SECTION 320 IS REPEALED IN ITS ENTIRETY AND THE FOLLOWING LANGUAGE IS ADOPTED IN ITS PLACE: SECTION 321 -HOPKINS POLICE DEPARTMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE ST ANDARDS AND PROCEDURES. . 321.01 Establishment. Pursuant to the Hopkins Charter, there is a Hopkins Police Department Review Committee with the powers and duties provided in the Charter and in this Section. 321.03 Definitions. (1) "Covered Positions" means full time employment positions with the Hopkins Police Department which are subject to the terms of a collective bargaining agreement as of the date this Section becomes law. (2) "Covered Employees" means persons employed in a Covered Position. (3) "Committee" means the Hopkins Police Depmiment Review Committee. (4) "CBA" means collective bargaining agreement. (5) "Discharge" means termination of a Covered Person's employment with the Hopkins Police Department. (6) "Discipline" means any of the following actions taken by the Department against a Covered Employee: suspension, with or without pay, written reprimand and demotion, except . I .- . demotions caused by a reduction in force. (7) "Service" or "Served" means personally delivered. Service by mail or certi fied mail shall not constitute adequate service. (8) "Documents" means all written documents, copies of written documents, computer hare! drives, computer disks, e-mails or other electronic communications. (9) "Department" means the Hopkins Police Department. 321.05 rmnos~. The purpose of this Section is to establish the procedures and standards to be utilized by the Committee when it is requested to conduct a review of a Discipline and Discharge decision affecting a Covered Employee. The Committee shall be an altemative to any other method or procedure available to a Covered Employee for the review of a Discipline or Discharge decision, whether such method or procedure is provided for by a CBA or other state or federal law. The Committee shall not operate in any way that prevents or limits a Covered Employees' legal right to a hearing arising from the Covered Employee's status as a military veteran. 321.07 Application. This Section applies to all Covered Positions as of the date this Section becomes law. . 321.09 Membership. The Committee shall consist of three (3) members who are citizens or Minnesota and residents of Hopkins. No Committee member shall, at the time of appointment, hold any other office or employment with the City of Hopkins. Committee members shall serve without pay, except that the City Council shall allocate funds to pay expenses incurred by the Committee to perfoml its duties. 321.11 Duties of Committee. The Committee shall, upon a request pursuant to this Section, review any Discipline or Discharge decision affecting a Covered Employee. 321.13 Meeting. The Committee shall, at its initial meeting, elect a Chairperson who shall preside overthe Committee's meetings. The Committee shall not meet unless all three members are present. The Committee's decisions do not require a unanimous vote. All decisions, including the Committee's final decision, may be by simple majority. The Committee shall, at its initial meeting, establish the time and place of its future meetings. 321.15 Request For Review. A Covered Employee may request review by the Committee of any Discipline or Discharge decision. The request must be served in writing to the Chief of Police with a copy to the City Manager and City Attorney. . 2 .- . 321.17 Alternative Review. Review by the Committee shall be lieu of any arbitration process established by a CBA according to the provisions of the Public Employment Labor Relations Act, except the Committee shall not operate in any way that prevents or limits a Covered Employee's right to a hearing arising from the Covered Employee's status as a military veteran. 321.19 Hearings. The hearings shall be open to the public and shall be transcribed. The COlllmittee shall have the power to issue subpoenas to compel the attendance and testimony of witnesses and the production of documents relevant to the case. Witnesses shall be entitled to the same fees and mileage as for attendance at District Court, except that any officer, agent or employee of the City of Hopkins who receives compensation for attendance shall not be entitled to fees or mileage. The Covered Employee shall have the right to be represented by a third party at the hearing, shall be entitled to present evidence on his or her behalf, shall be entitled to Subpoenas from the Committee to compel attendance of witnesses and shall be entitled to examine any witnesses testifying on behalf of the Depmtment. 321.21 Committee Authority. The Committee, after receiving the evidence, may sustain the Discipline or Discharge decision or overturn the Disciplille or Discharge decision and impose whatever lesser sanction the Committee deems appropliate, if any. In reviewing a Discipline or Discharge decision, the Committee shall uphold the decision unless the Committee detemlines that the decision was not reasonable, after giving due consideration to all evidence presented to the . Committee. The Committee may consider all evidence it deems relevant to the matter, including but not limited to the Covered Employee's work history with Hopkins or other employers, including any previous discipline, the length ofthe Covered Employee's employment with Hopkins, the nature and severity ofthe Covered Employee's actions for which the Discipline or Discharge was imposed and the nature and extent of Discipline or Discharge actions taken by the Department for other Covered Employees alleged to have committed similar violations. A Covered Employee reinstated by the Committee's decision is entitled to all back pay lost as a result of the Discipline or Discharge decision. 321.23 Findings and Decision. The Committee shall, upon completion of the hearing process, render a decision within five (5) business days. The decision shall be in writing and shall set forth factual findings upon which the Committee's decision is based. 321.25 Appeal. Either the Department or the Covered Employee or both may appeal the Committee's decision to Hennepin County District Court. The appeal must be in the fon11 of a District Court Complaint and must be served and filed within five (5) days of the Committee's decision, excluding the day the Covered Employee or Department received the decision. Copies of the Covered Employee's decision must be served on the Department, the City Manager ami City Attomey at the time the appeal is filed with the District Court. Copies ofthe Department's appeal must be served on the Covered Employee or Covered Employee's legal representative at the time the appeal is filed with the District Comt. Ifboth the Covered Employee and Department appeal, the appeals shall be consolidated by the District Court. The Committee Chair shall provide the District . 3 -- -- . Com1 with a copy of the record ofthe hearing, including the hearing transcript and any documental)' evidence submitted. The appeal shall be heard by a Judge of the District Court without ajury. The question to be detennined by the District Court shall be: "Was the Committee's decision supported by a preponderance of the evidence?" The District Court's decision shall be subject to appeal pursuant to the rules goveming Minnesota's appellate courts. 321.27 Severability. Every section, provision or part ofthis Ordinance is declared severable from every other section, provision or part. If any portion of this Ordinance is held invalid or unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction it shall not invalidate any other section, provision or part of this Ordinance. First reading: March 19, 2002 Second reading: April 2, 2002 Date of Publication: April 10, 2002 Date Ordinance Takes Effect: July 10,2002 . Mayor ATTEST: Terry Obermaier, City Clerk . 4 . City of Hopkins Hennepin County, Minnesota RESOLUTION NO. 2002-22 A Resolution abolishing the Police Civil Service Commission of the City of Hopkins WHEREAS, the City of Hopkins has delegated control and supervision over employment, promotion, discharge and suspension of all Pohce Department employees to the Police Civil Service Commission ofthe City of Hopkins; and WHEREAS, such control have been in effect since the 1940s, updated on August 1,1978 and is authorized by Minnesota Statutes, Section 4 J 9; and WHEREAS, the collective bargaining agreement with the Police Depa11ment employees and other City of Hopkins rules duplicate the process covered under the rules and regulations of the Commission; and . WHEREAS, the City Charter has been amended to establish a Police Review Committee that will serve as an altemative method of disciplinary review; NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved, by the City Council of the City of Hopkins, that tIle authority granted under Ordinance No. 77-438 to establish and operate a Police Civil Service Commission is abolished by unanimous consent effective July 10,2002. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Hopkins: First reading: March 19,2002 Second reading: April 2, 2002. By: Gene Maxwell, Mayor ATTEST: . Terry Obemlaier, City Clerk