Laserfiche WebLink
h F <br />• • ~ <br />roti~,l f. . <br />w: <br />i~: i ~' ', ,,i <br />i f ~ <br />Iff <br />~, <br />~~, <br />I <br />i ~1 <br />i': <br />i <br />~~~ , , <br />• ~ ~ i <br />x ~ <br />J R <br />i I~ <br />~ ~,w ` I« 6. ~'~ <br />~1 I,~. AN AMENDMENT REQpUIRING THAT A HEARING EXAM ';~ ER <br />~~ , ' ~ FOLLOW THE PI~OCEDURA;L RULES USED BYGT~E <br />~ OMMISSIQN AND ALLOWIN <br />I~• ~ ~ CIVIL SERVICE C <br />~ CITY TOOR FAILURE TO OLLOWMTHE RULESCISIQ, <br />Current Law '~ <br />Section 143.008 re uires that the commission adopt rules necessary fort ~' proper <br />conduct of commigssion business. There is no appeal of a heanng ~ 'rruner's <br />decision to district court by the city except in very limited situations. !' <br />',' Proposed change <br />!, ~ This amendment would require that a third party hearing examiner f ~ how the <br />j r;~ procedural rules set by the city's civil service commission. It would also all for an <br />'k appeal of the hearing exarruner's decision'- if the examiner failed to f ~ • ow the <br />j +~ commission's procedural rules. <br />j <br />F Reasons for Proposed Change <br />~. <br />~. <br />Civil service commissions often adopt detailed rules regarding procedures hat must <br />P~'' be followed during an appeal hearing. In the absence of a sppec fic rule, <br />~ !'` commissions often require ~n their rules that the rules of civil procedur shall be <br />followed. <br />Hearing examiners have often held hearings in which neither the commis ion rules <br />nor the rules of civil procedure were followed. Under current law, the ci cannot <br />~ ;appeal the hearing examiner's decision for failure to follow the commissi n's rules <br />'~ ~ of procedure. <br />~~ This amendment would clarify the procedural rules that the hearing exam ner must <br />follow and would allow the city to appeal a hearing examiner's decision ' ~- district <br />', ~ court for failure to follow those rules. <br />~~ <br />,~ <br />I" <br />', ; ~ !; ~ <br />i , <br />