Laserfiche WebLink
<br />e <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />2. <br />AN AMENDMENT REQUIRING HEARING <br />EXAMINERS TO BASE THEIR <br />DECISIONS ON SPECIFIC CRITERIA <br /> <br />Current Law <br /> <br />Section 143.057(1) states that the hearing examiner has the same duties and powers <br />as the Civil Service Commission as they relate to conducting disciplinary appeals, <br />including the right to issue subpoenas. <br /> <br />Section 143.057U) provides for an appeal to district court of a hearing examiner's <br />decision only on the grounds that the examiner's decision was without jurisdiction or <br />exceeded its jurisdiction or if the order was procured by fraud, collusion, or other <br />unlawful means. <br /> <br />Proposed Change <br /> <br />This amendment would clearly define the phrase: "the same duties and powers of <br />the commission." The proposed amendment would state that a commission or a <br />third party hearing examiner may uphold a suspension or dismissal of a fire fighter <br />or police officer for a violation of a civil service rule by determining that the specific <br />charges against the fire fighter or police officer are true. This amendment would <br />clarity that the same "findings" standard currently required of the commission is also <br />reguired of the hearing examiner. In the event the hearing examiner does not make <br />a fmding concerning the truth of the charges, that decision may be appealed. <br /> <br />Reasons for Proposed Change <br /> <br />The commission is required to find the truth of the specific charges against the fire <br />fighter or police officer, and the hearing examiner has the same duties and powers <br />as the commission. However, if a hearing examiner does not make a finding as to <br />the truth of the charges, there is no recourse. This change would specifically state <br />this duty of the hearing examiner and provide for an appeal if the hearing examiner <br />fails to comply. <br />