pages: CivilServiceBoard/2012-06-06.pdf, 13
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
CivilServiceBoard | 2012-06-06 | 13 | Member Batchelor asked Mr. Low if these positions were going to do revenue enhancing through programming and what drove the job descriptions. Mr. Low stated that yes there are some similarities between the Recreation Program Coordinator and the Recreation Services Specialist. The primary difference between the two levels is that the Recreation Service Specialist is going to be a much more responsible position for creating and evaluating programs so that the programs created are much more cost recovering then they are today. As indicated in the staff report, ARPD/City is trying to move ARPD towards a model of maximum cost recovery of which the goal is initially 60% cost recovery. There are many other recreation and park departments that get a much higher cost recovery, closer to 90%. In these lean times when the economy and the State are taking away a lot of our monies we must be much more creative with regard to delivering those recreation programs that are valued by the citizens on a cost recovery basis. Member Batchelor asked if there was talk at any time to look at the four candidates and make it promotional within their department. Mr. Low stated unfortunately Human Resources is not able to do that. Other Departments have expressed the same desire to limit the applicant pool to employees within their departments, but the way Human Resources has received feedback and instruction from the Board, in terms of implementing the civil service system here, is that whether it be on a promotional or open competitive basis you want to be as inclusive on a promotional basis to those who have worked here in a regular position for at least six months to be able to promote. This way you get a variety of diversity and you are providing people with the equal opportunity to move up through the organization, whether it is in that particular department or across departments. Member Malloy stated that it was intimated that interviews were done by phone and asked Mr. Low if interviews were done by phone. Mr. Low stated yes. There was one candidate who was physically unable to come to City Hall to interview. This is not the first time that Human Resources have made reasonable accommodations to allow candidates to interview, at least initially, over the telephone. Member Malloy asked if it was due to a medical condition. Mr. Low stated yes. Member Malloy asked if it was an ongoing condition such that when the person is performing the job if they were selected that they would need that type of accommodation in the future. Mr. Low stated that it was his understanding that it was a temporary disability that Human Resources were accommodating. Malloy asked if it was verified that the condition existed. Mr. Low stated yes. Member Malloy asked to be given a bit of understanding of why Assistant City Manager Goldman was part of the interview process. Is it customary within the City that someone who might be familiar with the potential candidates would be an interviewer? She understands that often panels involve subject matter experts and others but she would like a better understanding of how Ms. Goldman became involved in the process. Mr. Low stated that Ms. Goldman has a strong operational background in city government. She is currently the Assistant City Manager and is on the City Management track, but her prior Page -13- G:Personnel\CSBV Minutes/201 Minutes/2012-06-06 Special CSB Minutes-Draft | CivilServiceBoard/2012-06-06.pdf |