{"body": "CivilServiceBoard", "date": "2014-07-02", "page": 1, "text": "eny\nOF\nMINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING\nOF THE\nCIVIL SERVICE BOARD OF THE CITY OF ALAMEDA\nWEDNESDAY, July 2, 2014\n1.\nCALL TO ORDER\nThe meeting was called to order at 5:02 p.m. by Board President Peter Horikoshi.\n2.\nROLL CALL:\nPRESENT: President Peter Horikoshi, Vice President Dean Batchelor, Members Linda\nMcHugh, Marguerite Malloy, Zara Santos\nABSENT: Beth Fritz, Administrative Assistant II\nSTAFF PRESENT: Jill Kovacs, Acting Human Resources Director and Executive Secretary to\nthe Board\nStephanie Sierra, Administrative Services Director\nMichael Roush, Attorney - Civil Service Board Legal Counsel\nChris Low, Senior Human Resources Analyst-AMP\nMonica Selles, Human Resources Analyst II\nSharlene Shikhmuradova, Administrative Technician II\n3.\nMINUTES:\nA.\nApproval of Minutes of the Regular meeting of April 2, 2014.\nMember McHugh moved that the April 2, 2014 Minutes be approved. Motion was seconded by\nVice President Batchelor, and was passed by a 5-0 vote.\n4.\nCONSENT CALENDAR:\nSUMMARY REPORT FOR EXAMINATION ELIGIBLE LISTS AND CLASSIFICATIONS FOR\nJULY 2, 2014.", "path": "CivilServiceBoard/2014-07-02.pdf"}
{"body": "CivilServiceBoard", "date": "2014-07-02", "page": 2, "text": "City of Alameda\nPage 2\nCivil Service Board Minutes\nRegular Meeting July 2, 2014\n4-A-i.\nELIGIBLE LIST ESTABLISHED\nDATE ESTABLISHED\nEXAM NO.\nFirefighter\n05/08/2014\n2012-31\nHuman Resources Manager\n05/20/2014\n2014-12PR\nManagement Analyst\n05/07/2014\n2014-08PR\nSenior Account Clerk\n04/08/2014\n2014-06\n4-A-ii.\nELIGIBLE LIST EXTENDED\nDATE ESTABLISHED\nEXAM NO.\nFinance Supervisor\n11/13/2013\n2013-32\nHuman Resources Analyst I\n06/27/2013\n2013-21PR\nIntermediate Clerk\n10/10/2013\n2013-30\nOffice Assistant\n10/28/2013\n2013-31\nPolice Captain\n05/01/2013\n2013-12PR\nPolice Officer\nJohn Yu\n12/09/2013\n2013-05\n4-A-iii. ELIGIBLE LIST EXPIREDICANCELLEDI\nEXHAUSTED\nDATE ESTABLISHED\nEXAM NO.\nAdministrative Technician II\n01/09/2013\n2012-42\nElectrical Maintenance Technician\n02/19/2014\n2013-34R\nHuman Resources Analyst Il\n10/17/2013\n2013-28\nSenior Building Code Compliance Officer 02/24/2014\n2014-05PR\nSupervising Librarian\n05/24/2012\n2012-18\n4-A-iv. LIST OF SPECIFICATIONS\nExisting Classification Specification Revision:\nNone\nNew Class Specifications:\n-\nDeputy Public Works Director\n-\nPolice Maintenance Technician\n-\nPolice Technician\n-\nPublic Safety Communications Supervisor\nVice President Batchelor stated that he had a question regarding the Police Maintenance Technician\nspecification. Member Malloy stated that she had a question regarding the Police Technician\nspecification.\nVice President Batchelor stated that the examples of duties in the Police Maintenance Technician\nspecification sounds like some of the duties are no longer going to be performed by Public Works.\nActing Human Resources Director Kovacs stated yes, that is correct. Vice President Batchelor stated\nthere are a lot of duties for this individual job, including routine Police Department building\nmaintenance work plus maintenance on police vehicles, possibly including mobile computers inside\nG:\\Personnel\\CSB\\AI Minutes\\2 Minutes/2014-07-02 CSB Minutes-Final.doc", "path": "CivilServiceBoard/2014-07-02.pdf"}
{"body": "CivilServiceBoard", "date": "2014-07-02", "page": 3, "text": "City of Alameda\nPage 3\nCivil Service Board Minutes\nRegular Meeting July 2, 2014\nthe vehicles, and conducting surveys. It seems like there are a lot of duties for this one individual.\nActing Human Resources Director Kovacs stated there are a lot of duties. Right now they have a\ndedicated maintenance/custodian position. Over time the position has evolved and the work requires\nproficiency in specialized needs of the Police Department. For instance, troubleshooting the issues\nwith the security systems, sirens on automobiles, and coordination of taking vehicles to the shop, etc.\nIt is anticipated that this would be a promotional opportunity. It is not appropriate to upgrade the\nposition to a Maintenance Worker Il because the specialization and nature of the work is not\ninterchangeable with what would be represented by a Maintenance Worker II in Public Works. The\nskill set is very different.\nVice President Batchelor stated that it seems that Public Works should be able to take care of the\nbuilding. Acting Human Resources Director Kovacs stated that is correct. But they only have one\nposition in the Police Department. Vice President Batchelor asked if we were creating this position\nfor this individual. Acting Human Resources Director Kovacs stated that there would be a\npromotional\nopportunity in the Police Department. Any maintenance workers or employees\nthroughout the City would be able to apply.\nMember McHugh stated that this was a very interesting mix of skills required to do this job. What\nhappens if something happens to the employee? Then you would have to redefine the job? Then you\nwould have to find someone that knows HVAC, security systems, locks, etc. It is a pretty broad\nspectrum. Acting Human Resources Director Kovacs stated that this is meeting the needs of the\nPolice Department. It is not unusual that when an employee with long tenure departs a position, that\nit be reviewed, possibly redefined, and work distributed differently. For instance, in the Fire\nDepartment the same person had been doing their payroll for over 25 years and the position had\nbeen elevated to the level of an Administrative Tech III specializing in fire payroll. When that person\nretired, the position was reviewed and downgraded because the Fire Department could not justify\nhaving someone new to the work at the higher level. Someone who had background in the Finance\nDepartment filled that position as an Administrative Tech II. Maybe someday that person will develop\nthe level of expertise to be at the advanced level.\nMember Malloy asked if the Human Resources Department talks with the Department Heads and\nsays to them that we do not want to create jobs for one position. And, if you are you holding a\nbudgeted position, is the Department going to fill that lower position? Are the Departments keeping\nthese lower positions in their budgets? Acting Human Resources Director Kovacs stated no, it varies.\nIn this particular case, a Police Maintenance Technician position is being added and a Maintenance\nWorker I position is being eliminated. A promotional examination will be conducted and the\nincumbent Maintenance Worker I has the opportunity to apply. You do run the risk of the incumbent\nemployee not making the cut in the exam and they would be subject to layoff. That has happened\nbefore.\nMember Santos stated that the duties #7 and #8 do not seem aligned with duties #1 thru #6. Are\nthose duties in the specification as a catchall or is this incumbent actually doing these things. Acting\nHuman Resources Director Kovacs stated that in this particular bargaining unit, there is a Police\nTechnician, Property and Evidence Technician, and Crime Scene Investigators, and when the Police\nDepartment has an incident anybody who is available is expected to participate. They may need to\ncontrol traffic, control crowds, etc. They need to be able to help in police actions as appropriate,\nwhatever the police action might be.\nG:\\Personnel\\CSB\\AI Minutes/201 Minutes/2014-07-02 CSB Minutes-Final.doc", "path": "CivilServiceBoard/2014-07-02.pdf"}
{"body": "CivilServiceBoard", "date": "2014-07-02", "page": 4, "text": "City of Alameda\nPage 4\nCivil Service Board Minutes\nRegular Meeting July 2, 2014\nMember McHugh stated that for the Police Technician specification it states that drug screening is\nrequired but she did not notice a drug screening requirement for the Police Maintenance Technician.\nActing Human Resources Director Kovacs responded that the Police Maintenance Technician is part\nof Alameda City Employees Association (ACEA), which is the more general employee association\nbargaining unit, and the Police Technician is part of the Alameda Police Officer's Association Non-\nSworn, which is a different bargaining unit. The Police Technician wears a uniform, works varying\nshifts, possibly including holidays, etc. The Police Maintenance Technician does not work on\nholidays, does not wear a uniform, and that employee is not going to be involved in law enforcement\ncode work. Whereas, the Police Technician deals with abandoned vehicle reports, parking reports,\netc. They are more involved in the direct nature of law enforcement. The Police Maintenance\nTechnician does specialized skilled Police Department maintenance work, but is not regularly\ninvolved in activities that directly support law enforcement.\nMember McHugh asked if there is a public safety issue or something else given all the things that this\nperson (Police Maintenance Technician) would work on and that they are exempt from drug testing.\nActing Human Resources Director Kovacs stated that the Department of Transportation - Drug &\nAlcohol Testing (DOT) requirements are very strict and this person is not required to have that level of\ndriver's license that would make them subject to the DOT testing.\nMember Malloy asked if the Police Technician is a new classification and if we are eliminating one.\nActing Human Resources Director Kovacs stated that this job specification has been a long time in\nthe making, since 2006. The City used to have Police Technicians I, II, and III classifications. In\n2006, these classifications were segregated into Crime Scene Specialist, Senior Public Safety\nDispatcher from Police Technician III; Dispatcher and Jailer from Police Technician II; and Police\nTechnician I became Police Technician.\nAdministrative Services Director Sierra stated that although this particular position is not required to\nhave drug testing the Board needs to keep in mind that that there are a number of other positions\nwithin the City that also deal with security systems, locks, etc., especially maintenance workers who\ndo work on locks, and security issues, and those employees are not required to have drug testing in\naddition to the IT Department.\nMember Malloy stated that cognitively she cannot conceive of a person having a high school diploma\nand two years of experience and being required to do the examples of duties. It seems so far\ndisconnected from what would be required of an individual to do the job. Is there something being\neliminated? Member Malloy asked Acting Human Resources Director Kovacs to give her the\nrationale as to why you would believe that someone with a high school diploma and two years'\nexperience working at McDonald's could conceptually, cognitively, do the things that are asked in the\nexamples of the specifications. Acting Human Resources Director Kovacs stated that the education\nand experience requirements were carried-over from the original Police Technician I job specification.\nLike all job specifications this one is designed to provide latitude. A huge number of applicants are\nexpected because the minimum qualifications/requirements are low. It would be up to staff and the\nPolice Department, on the strength of the applicant pool, to take the strongest applicants with the\nmost relevant work experience.\nMember Santos asked if the Police Technician job required following a set of procedures and\nparameters. Acting Human Resources Director Kovacs explained that the distinguishing features\nstates \"initially supervision and training are given in detail and as the incumbent becomes more\nG:\\Personnel\\CSBVA Minutes\\20 Minutes\\2014-07-02 CSB Minutes-Final.doc", "path": "CivilServiceBoard/2014-07-02.pdf"}
{"body": "CivilServiceBoard", "date": "2014-07-02", "page": 5, "text": "City of Alameda\nPage 5\nCivil Service Board Minutes\nRegular Meeting July 2, 2014\ncapable the incumbents work with a higher degree of independence.\" So yes, they do function in\naccordance with specific departmental policies and procedures.\nMember Malloy asked if there was going to be one position or multiple positions. Acting Human\nResources Director Kovacs stated the City currently has one position. She further explained that if\nthe incumbent were to vacate the position they would likely hire someone who has less experience\nand would initially require a lot of supervision and training. After a number of years, the employee\nwould operate with more independence and be compensated more as they moved up through the\nsteps of the pay range.\nMember Santos asked if we need to say supervision and training are given in detail. If we say\n\"initially\" in the specification it could last a few years. This would address that this is an entry-level job.\nActing Human Resources Director Kovacs stated it is an entry-level job. This is our typical narrative.\nMember Malloy asked if the role of the Civil Service Board is to rubber stamp whatever the City\nCouncil has approved as opposed to them being able to interject or suggest amendments or\nchanges. Acting Human Resources Director Kovacs stated she would not say rubber stamp. The\nBoard's function is to make sure specifications represent the work that is to be performed. It is up to\nCouncil to determine what the proper positions are, and the Board is to make sure specifications\nsupport and represent the work that is to be performed. The Board is also responsible for ensuring\nthat recruitments and examinations are conducted in ways that represent and test for the skills,\nknowledge and experience that are necessary to do the designated work.\nMr. Roush, Attorney - Civil Service Board Legal Counsel, stated that he feels Member Malloy is\nasking if the Board has the discretion to modify the proposed class specification. He feels that the\nBoard does, if the Board feels that there are parts of the specification that need to be modified, they\nhave that discretion to do so. For example, if a specification had a certain education level that they\nfelt should be raised or lowered, they should articulate that and then see what staff's position would\nbe as to why that might be a good idea or a hindrance to recruitment, etc. It is within the Board's\npurview to make those kind of suggestions and to review and weigh in on whether this is a fair\nrepresentation of what this class specification ought to be.\nMember Malloy asked for a copy of the organizational charts that currently exist for each department.\nShe feels this would give her a better perspective of how they fit into the grander scheme of the\ndepartments. Acting Human Resources Director Kovacs stated that there are organizational charts\nincluded in the two-year budget. Human Resources can provide an updated chart.\nPresident Horikoshi stated it is not up to the Civil Service Board to say this seems like an odd mix of\nduties. If he were in Human Resources and working on a specification like this, his questions to the\ndepartment would be that they should not be writing a job specification for just one person. The\nspecification should be written according to what the department needs a position to do. Typically you\nwould not have a position in the Police Department do all these things. Mr. Roush, stated that if the\nBoard feels that the specification is too specific and should be more general then the Board should\narticulate that to staff and not approve it. The Board can direct staff to go back to the Police\nDepartment and talk to them about how the specification should be revised. Acting Human\nResources Director Kovacs stated that the department's original vision was to move this position into\nthe Police Technician classification, which also would have moved it into the non-sworn Police\nOfficers Association bargaining unit. Given the scope of the work of the two individual positions,\nG:\\Personnel\\CSB\\A Minutes/2014 Minutes/2014-07-02 CSB Minutes-Final.doc", "path": "CivilServiceBoard/2014-07-02.pdf"}
{"body": "CivilServiceBoard", "date": "2014-07-02", "page": 6, "text": "City of Alameda\nPage 6\nCivil Service Board Minutes\nRegular Meeting July 2, 2014\ngreat effort was made to put it in a general classification. It was determined that work of the Police\nDepartment maintenance position did not belong in that association or in the same job classification\nwith the other position. They also looked at the use of the Maintenance Worker II classification. Like\nmany other areas, maintenance entry-level positions could be interchangeable. But a Maintenance\nWorker Il in Public Works could not come to the Police Department and do the same work as the\nproposed Police Maintenance Technician. Likewise, an incumbent Police Maintenance Technician\nwould not be expected to go to Public Works Maintenance and do the work of a Maintenance Worker\nII position. We are looking at a scope of work that is just too different.\nMember McHugh stated that if the duties were parsed by skill set, you would not have a full-time\nposition. Acting Human Resources Director Kovacs agreed there would not be a full-time position.\nMember McHugh asked if it would justify two part-time people. Acting Human Resources Director\nKovacs stated then you would be talking about a substantial change to the organizational structure.\nYou would be eliminating a full-time position and replacing it with two part-time positions, initiating a\nlayoff and meet and confer with impacted associations. Also, you would be replacing a full-time\nemployee with two part-time employees, which is prohibited in the MOUs.\nMember Malloy asked for the salary range for the Police Maintenance Technician and the Police\nTechnician. Acting Human Resources Director Kovacs stated the Police Maintenance Technician will\nbe equivalent to the Maintenance Worker II. She will have to get back to Member Malloy for the\nrange of the Police Technician.\nMember Malloy stated that if she had the salary range for the positions it would help her with the\nperception of the educational requirements and employment standards and why you would get many\napplicants for one job and not the other job. Seeing the salary ranges would help her determine if the\nCity is doing a disservice by creating specs that reflect what we are not looking for. Acting Human\nResources Director Kovacs stated that for the Police Technician we could be looking for someone\nwho is experienced in social services or a medical environment where complex information is dealt\nwith.\nVice President Batchelor stated that you are still dealing with only a high school education for either\none of these positions. He would think that should be higher education and a little higher than two\nyears of work experience in both of the specifications.\nMember Santos stated that maybe one solution is to simply flush out the description on the\nexperience to reflect the more specific skill set. You need to be careful to be accurate. You want it to\nbe fairly accurate for purposes of defending against any sort of litigation. Acting Human Resources\nDirector Kovacs stated that the approach is to allow the analyst the flexibility depending on what the\nlabor market is at the time of the recruitment so that the specifications are living breathing documents\nand not stagnant and rigid. In a tight labor market, it can be difficult to get the candidates we need if\nthe specification is too tight and this is why all specifications also say \"any combination to education\nexperience likely to provide the required knowledge and abilities. A typical way to obtain the\nknowledge and abilities would be \" When you have a market where you are receiving only four\napplications, if two applications have experience that is directly related, they progress in the\nexamination process. If a correlation can be made that the other two have applicable knowledge and\nexperience, the analyst can determine that there is a relevant skill set and that the candidate/s should\nbe invited to interview to present themselves with their credentials and background, and a\ndetermination made if the candidate could actually perform and execute the duties successfully.\nG:\\Personnel\\CSB\\Al Minutes/201 Minutes/2014-07-02 CSB Minutes-Final.doc", "path": "CivilServiceBoard/2014-07-02.pdf"}
{"body": "CivilServiceBoard", "date": "2014-07-02", "page": 7, "text": "City of Alameda\nPage 7\nCivil Service Board Minutes\nRegular Meeting July 2, 2014\nWhen you have a bigger applicant pool of 80 applications, you could be much more stringent and\ntight in applying the standards.\nMember Santos stated that she agrees that the specification should not be written tightly. She is\nwondering if it is possible to take some of the descriptions and put it into the experience and then put\nsome of the requirements into the abilities.\nActing Human Resources Director Kovacs stated that for the Police Technician the top salary step is\n$31.53 per hour with a 40-hour workweek. The Police Maintenance Technician top salary step is\n$31.77 per hour with a 38 or 40-hour workweek.\nMember Malloy made a motion to approve the Consent Calendar items with the exception of the\nPolice Technician and the Police Maintenance Technician specifications. Board Member Santos\nseconded the motion. Motion was approved 5-0.\nMember Malloy made a motion to direct staff to talk with the Police Department in regard to the Police\nTechnician and Police Maintenance Technician and discuss whether or not they are open to\nexplaining in more detail, information required with respect to recruiting and retaining people based\nupon education and experience and hopefully looking at the knowledge and abilities sections and\nincorporating information from those two areas into the job specifications. Member McHugh\nseconded the motion. Motion was approved 5-0.\n5.\nREGULAR AGENDA ITEMS\n5-A. Informational Reports Regarding Approval of Lateral Transfers:\n- Administrative Management Analyst to Police Records Supervisor (McNiff)\n-\nExecutive Assistant to Executive Assistant-Alameda Municipal Power (Ablett)\n-\nExecutive Assistant to Executive Assistant-Alameda Municipal Power (Esparza)\n-\nOffice Assistant to Office Assistant-Alameda Municipal Power (Hanna)\n-\nAdministrative Services Coordinator to Administrative Services Coordinator-\nAlameda Municipal Power (Kelly)\n-\nAdministrative Services Coordinator to Administrative Services Coordinator-\nAlameda Municipal Power (Sibley)\n-\nSenior Human Resources Analyst to Senior Human Resources Analyst-Alameda\nMunicipal Power (Low)\nMember Malloy asked how the transfer of Administrative Management Analyst to Police Record\nSupervisor is equivalent. Acting Human Resources Director Kovacs stated that they are not\nequivalent. This action is the result of ongoing staff work to convert use of generalist classifications to\nmore function specific classifications where the function specific positions have been approved. The\nBoard will be seeing more of these as work continues or as additional function specific positions are\napproved.\nMember Malloy asked if the Board could get a copy of the specifications attached to the requests for\nthe lateral transfers to help the Board do a comparison.\nVice President Batchelor asked about the delay of a year's time in seeing the job description. Acting\nG:\\Personnel\\CSB\\A Minutes/201- Minutes\\2014-07-02 CSB Minutes-Final.doc", "path": "CivilServiceBoard/2014-07-02.pdf"}
{"body": "CivilServiceBoard", "date": "2014-07-02", "page": 8, "text": "City of Alameda\nPage 8\nCivil Service Board Minutes\nRegular Meeting July 2, 2014\nHuman Resources Director Kovacs stated the classification was approved but we do not have the\nstaff resources to immediately write the job specifications. There is a large backlog of job\nspecifications. The Police Technician has been on the list for almost a decade.\nVice President Batchelor stated that he thought the job specification was done before the\nclassification. Acting Human Resources Director Kovacs stated no, not necessarily.\n5-B. Informational Report on Cancellation of Eligible List - Electrical Maintenance\nTechnician, 2013-34R\nThe Interim General Manager-AMP has informed Human Resources that the eligible list for Electrical\nMaintenance Technician no longer meets the needs of the City and requested that the list be\ncancelled. The eligible list includes two candidates who are qualified, but are no longer interested in\nworking for the City. Therefore, neither of the two remaining candidates meets the organization's\nbusiness requirements or hiring needs. A new recruitment for Electrical Maintenance Technician will\nbe conducted.\n5-C. Activity Report - Period of March 1, 2014 through May 31, 2014.\nFULL-TIME HIRES\nDATE\nDEPARTMENT\nJOB CLASSIFICATION\n03/24/14\nAlameda Municipal Power\nElectrical Maintenance Technician\n04/07/14\nCommunity Development\nPlanner I\n04/07/14\nCommunity Development\nEconomic Development Manager\n04/14/14\nCommunity Development\nPlanner I\n04/21/14\nCommunity Development\nFire/Bldg Code Compliance Officer\n04/28/14\nPublic Works\nMaintenance Worker II\n05/05/14\nCity Attorney\nAssistant City Attorney II\n05/27/14\nFire\nFirefighter (2)\nPROMOTIONS\nDATE\nDEPARTMENT\nJOB CLASSIFICATION\n03/09/14\nAlameda Municipal Power\nSubstation and Meter Supervisor\n03/23/14\nPolice\nPolice Lieutenant\n03/23/14\nPolice\nPolice Sergeant\n03/24/14\nAlameda Municipal Power\nLine Working Supervisor\n04/06/14\nCommunity Development\nSenior Building Code Compliance Officer\n05/04/14\nFinance\nSenior Account Clerk\n05/18/14\nPublic Works\nMaintenance Worker II\n05/18/14\nPublic Works\nManagement Analyst\nRECERTIFICATION TO FULL-TIME\nDATE\nDEPARTMENT\nJOB CLASSIFICATION\n03/24/14\nCommunity Development\nCombination Building Inspector\n05/19/14\nAlameda Municipal Power\nAdministrative Services Coordinator\nG:\\Personnel\\CSB\\A Minutes/201- Minutes/2014-07-02 CSB Minutes-Final.doc", "path": "CivilServiceBoard/2014-07-02.pdf"}
{"body": "CivilServiceBoard", "date": "2014-07-02", "page": 9, "text": "City of Alameda\nPage 9\nCivil Service Board Minutes\nRegular Meeting July 2, 2014\n(Reinstated from Layoff)\nLATERAL TRANSFER TO NEW POSITION\nDATE\nDEPARTMENT\nJOB CLASSIFICATION\n05/28/14\nLibrary\nAdministrative Technician II\nFrom\nCity Attorney\nAdministrative Technician II\nRETIREMENTS\nDATE\nDEPARTMENT\nJOB CLASSIFICATION\n04/19/14\nPolice\nCrime Scene Specialist\n05/02/14\nAlameda Municipal Power\nElectrical Maintenance Technician\nSEPARATIONS\nDATE\nDEPARTMENT\nJOB CLASSIFICATION\n04/11/14\nPublic Works\nMaintenance Worker I\n04/14/14\nAlameda Municipal Power\nAssistant General Manager-Energy Resources\n5-D. Elections of Civil Service Board President and Vice President\nVice President Batchelor moved that President Horikoshi be reelected as the Civil Service Board\nPresident. Motion was seconded by Member Malloy, and was passed by a 5-0 vote.\nMember Santos moved that Vice President Batchelor be reelected as the Civil Service Vice\nPresident. Motion was seconded by Member McHugh, and was passed by a 5-0 vote.\n6.\nORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA (PUBLIC COMMENT)\n(Any person may address the Civil Service Board in regard to any matter over which the Civil\nService Board has jurisdiction or of which it may take cognizance that is not on the agenda)\nNone.\n7.\nCIVIL SERVICE BOARD COMMUNICATIONS (COMMUNICATIONS FROM BOARD)\nVice President Batchelor asked about the Sunshine Ordinance completion form. Human Resources\nstaff will check the status of the Board form submissions.\nPresident Horikoshi shared with the Board a letter that was received on April 2. He asked that the\nletter be put on the next agenda. Acting Human Resources Director Kovacs stated it will be\nagendized with an informational report.\n8.\nCIVIL SERVICE BOARD COMMUNICATIONS (COMMUNICATIONS FROM STAFF)\nActing Human Resources Director Kovacs congratulated Member Malloy on her reappointment to the\nCivil Service Board.\nG:\\Personnel\\CSBVAll Minutes/2014 Minutes/2014-07-02 CSB Minutes-Final.doc", "path": "CivilServiceBoard/2014-07-02.pdf"}
{"body": "CivilServiceBoard", "date": "2014-07-02", "page": 10, "text": "City of Alameda\nPage 10\nCivil Service Board Minutes\nRegular Meeting July 2, 2014\nActing Human Resources Director Kovacs also welcomed Sharlene Shikhmuradova, Administrative\nTechnician II, back to Human Resources after her leave of absence.\nActing Human Resources Director Kovacs stated that Glenn Steiger has been hired as the new\nGeneral Manager of Alameda Municipal Power.\n9.\nCONFIRMATION OF NEXT CIVIL SERVICE BOARD MEETING\nWednesday, October 1, 2014\n10. ADJOURNMENT\nMeeting was adjourned at 5:58 p.m.\nRespectfully submitted,\nsigh\nJill Kovacs\nActing Human Resources Director and\nExecutive Secretary to the Civil Service Board\nG:\\Personnel\\CSB\\All Minutes/2014 Minutes)2014-07-02 CSB Minutes-Final.doc", "path": "CivilServiceBoard/2014-07-02.pdf"}