HomeMy WebLinkAboutMemo - Kiff PD ChiefIf EMORANDUM
TO: Honorable Chair Bergeson & Members of the Charter Update Commission
FROM: Dave Kiff, City Manager
DATE: March 16, 2010
RE: About the Civil Service System
The economic times have been both a challenge and an opportunity. The City's budget problems
have encouraged us to re -think what we do to modernize our processes and making them more
efficient. I believe we can achieve greater efficiency in managing personnel by improving our Civil
Service System to tailor its role to the unique functions it can serve within our personnel system.
2009 has highlighted some areas where we can improve the system. Last year's investigation and
promotional processes in the NBPD showed that we have an overly complex web of personnel
regulations that are often in conflict or create ambiguities. This complexity results in confusion
and can increase our legal expense. There are many regulations within the City to be realigned in
order to act consistently with state and federal law. The City can whittle down the amount of
regulations while administering our personnel system consistent with state and federal law and
preserving appropriate protections for City employees.
Our Civil Service ordinance is a fifty-two year old document that cannot be updated without a vote
of the people. Some of its provisions are inconsistent with existing law and are outdated in the
face of modern personnel practices. Some aspects of the system simply do not serve a purpose in
the context of current law. For these reasons, I respectfully request your assistance to help delete
unnecessary provisions and to make the ordinance more manageable.
To achieve these goals, I recommend two specific steps toward modernization:
1. Affirm Core CSB Functions. Amend Ordinance No. 866, the initiative enacted measure that
sets the duties and functions of the system. The amendments would update the ordinance as
well as asking the voters to return the authority to make further amendments to it to their
elected representatives. The ordinance would retain the core functions that can be best
performed by the Civil Service Board. Experience has shown that the Board serves the City and
the employees best as:
Honorable Chair and Members of the Charter Update Commission
March 16, 2010
Page: 2
a. An administrative appeals body for disciplinary actions and promotional questions, in
order to protect the merit -based goals of the system; and
b. As an overseer of independent investigations into the administration of the Civil Service
System (such has occurred with respect to the Police Department's promotional
investigation); and
c. An advisory body to the City Council as to employee -related matters (evaluation
progress, etc) that the Council may affirmatively direct to the CSB.
2. Assistant Chiefs. it does not make sense to me that the Police Chief and Fire Chief have
deputy chiefs who are not "at -will" employees. While these positions still have rights under
POBAR and FBAR, the nature of top management involves confidential information and critical
decisions that require managers to think outside of a represented role. What if, for instance, a
police chief needs operational advice on an issue currently on the negotiations table? He or
she has no one to turn to who is not, in some way, affected by the negotiations.
Let's look back a bit in history. City government is more complicated than it was in 1958. Our
organization had 277 employees at the time of the passage of the Civil Service ordinance.
Presently we have about 800 employees. Our Police Department had 58 employees and our
Fire Department had 40 employees in 1958. Currently, the Police Department has about 255
employees and Fire has 156 employees (plus 35.26 seasonal FTEs). As a result, the jobs of
department heads have become vastly more difficult.
Department heads need a second level of management available to them that can stand in
their place when they are not available and provide them support without the potential
complications of other interests. The Charter already provides such support to the City
Manager and to the City Attorney. Department heads simply should be placed in the same
position with respect to this issue as the City Manager and the City Attorney.
I have consulted with the Police Chief, Robert Luman, on this matter. Chief Luman believes that an
at -will assistant department head would improve his ability to manage the department. I have
attached a copy of a memorandum from him on this issue.
The duties, job qualifications, and job description of an assistant department head position would
need to be formulated based upon the specific needs of the Fire Department and the Police
Department. Generally, however, I see the position as being at -will. The position would be filled
by the respective chiefs following the recruitment guidelines under our Employee Policy Manual
and as administered by the Human Resources Department. I could envision the CSB assisting in
the development and review of the job qualifications and job description, but the hiring decision
needs to be made by the chiefs.
Honorable Chair and Members of the Charter Update Commission
March 16, 2010
Page: 3
I do not believe the positions will adversely affect promotional opportunities for internal
department personnel. We have good staff here who can make the leap to the at -will chief's
position — I can't see how they might be reluctant to compete for the next step of their
professional growth if that is an at -will assistant chief's position. What better way to learn the
challenging role of a chief than to be an assistant subject to the same challenges that the chief is
subject to?
The City Attorney tells me that the only way to create this level of assistant department head
position outside of Civil Service is througha Charter amendment.
I welcome your thoughts and those of the CSB. Please feel free to contact me if you have any
questions or concerns at 949-644-3000 or dkiff@newportbeachca.gov.
Thanks for considering my views in this matter.
Attachment: Memorandum from Robert Luman, Chief of Police
cc: Mayor and Members of City Council
David R. Hunt, City Attorney
Terri Cassidy, Director, Human Resources Dept.
Robert Luman, Chief of Police
PpR
crl� CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
v OFFICE OF THE CHIEF OF POLICE
March 15, 2010
TO: Dave Kiff, City Manager
FROM: Robert M. Luman, Chief of Police
SUBJECT: "AT WILL" ASSISTANT CHIEF POSITION FOR THE NEWPORT BEACH
POLICE DEPARTMENT
I would like to begin by stating that I believe establishing an at -will Assistant Chief of
Police position in the Newport Beach Police Department will strengthen the
Department's ability to best serve the Community.
That being said, I will provide some context for my belief, which is based on personal
experience with at -will positions. I began my career in Long Beach as a Police Officer
in 1968. 1 was fortunate and progressed through the ranks. In 1985, while serving in
the "represented rank" of Lieutenant, I had to make a decision about competing for an
at -will Commander position. I ultimately made the decision and entered into the
Commander promotional process. In 1986, 1 was promoted to Police Commander and
served the Long Beach Police Department for the next 14 years in an at -will capacity
while promoting to the positions of Deputy Chief and, ultimately, to Chief of Police.
This "Long Beach Model," as 1 will call it, provided police executives in the organization
that were not conflicted between their allegiance to the City/Police Department and their
allegiance to an employee group. In other words, the Chief of Police had a group of
Command Officers in the organization with whom he could discuss any and all police -
related matters.
In reflecting back on my time in Long Beach, I realized that being unrepresented gave
me a sense of freedom and a clearer perspective on the role of a police executive. I
became even more focused on what was in the best interest of the City, the
Department, and its employees, while remaining unencumbered by the pressures of
group think. I felt free of any fiduciary expectation to do what was in the best interest of
an employee group. I found myself concentrating more on implementing the best
practices to provide police service to the community, which included special attention to
the safety of our personnel.
I have worked almost 20 years in an at -will capacity for several different cities and
police organizations. The following observations are based on my personal experience
at police departments other than Newport Beach; although the same principles apply
here. That experience has reinforced the wisdom of the "Long Beach Model." As an
example, a natural conflict of interest develops during contract negotiations where the
Chief may need to collaborate on labor issues with a Command Officer who is
March 15, 2010
Page 2
represented by the labor group. This is not a day-to-day occurrence; however, during
these times, there is no one in the organization to whom a Chief can turn. He is unable
to go to those most familiar with the issues for their thoughts related to the pros and
cons of contract proposals or changes. Discussing these issues with represented
Command Officers places the Command Officer in a compromised position of trying to
serve the Chief and the Department while overlooking their affiliation with the employee
group of which they are a member.
On a more regular basis, however, items come up that a ffect wages, hours, and
working conditions. These items or issues are covered under the purview of employees
groups and may be considered "meet and confer" items. Any one of these items could
impact all employees in the organization. In resolving these items, a Chief should
confer with other Command Officers who are familiar with the issues prior to making
important operational or administrative decisions. Asking represented subordinates to
weigh in on such matters, again, places them in a position of compromising their
obligation to their employee group. The problem is only exacerbated if the Command
Officer is serving on the labor group's Board of Directors.
The promotion of an at -will Assistant Chief of Police clearly mitigates the above
concerns. It provides the Chief of Police a confidant. It gives the Chief someone to
work with that can provide input and feedback that is unfettered by ties to an employee
group. Additionally, it provides a clear Chain of Command, which provides
unquestioned leadership in the absence of the Chief of Police. It eliminates a potential
area of dissention among peer level Command Staff who may all feel entitled to lead the
organization. The Assistant Chief position also facilitates succession planning in the
organization by providing a clear stepping stone, above the rank of Captain, to the
position of Chief of Police.
For the above reasons, I would like to reiterate my support for the "at -will" Assistant
Chief of Police position to establish a second in command within the Newport Beach
Police Department. I am confident the City of Newport Beach and its Police Department
will find it beneficial to implement such a position.