Skip to content Skip to left sidebar Skip to footer

Terry Hill

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 20 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: April Non-Consent Items #2936
    Terry Hill
    Participant

    Please pull 28 from consent.

    in reply to: TEST #2806
    Terry Hill
    Participant

    Yes to test

    in reply to: February Non-Consent Items #2702
    Terry Hill
    Participant

    Courtney, please pull items 12,16 and 26 from consent.
    Also asking how “deep in the mud” do we want to go on discussion of any items on zoning during workshop? Would you prefer zoning discussion be held till next week?

    in reply to: December Non-Consent Items #2486
    Terry Hill
    Participant

    Please pull #37 and 38 from consent. Thank you

    in reply to: October Non-Consent #2286
    Terry Hill
    Participant

    Please pull #43 from consent. Thanks

    in reply to: Commission Reorganization – Committees #2206
    Terry Hill
    Participant

    I would like to serve, first time, on retirement and pension and continue on rules ( only if slot available, am glad to give others a chance)

    in reply to: Reorganization #2180
    Terry Hill
    Participant

    Yes

    in reply to: Merit System Reforms – DISCUSSION #2138
    Terry Hill
    Participant

    Got it, thanks for your work on this.
    Terry

    in reply to: PUBLIC HEARING SCHEDULE #2115
    Terry Hill
    Participant

    Yes

    in reply to: Merit System Reforms – DISCUSSION #2054
    Terry Hill
    Participant

    This was sent to me by a uniformed sheriff’s officer. I believe it deserves consideration. Thanks, Terry.
    a. Section 9.5.1 labeled “General” has been removed and a new section, labeled under the new ordinance Sec42-67 Grievances which may be addressed by the Merit System Board. What is interesting is the removal of such terminology and rights for employees such as: “a grievance is defined as any perceived wrong, considered as grounds for complaint arising out of a personnel action” –
    b. The new Sec 42-60, labeled Transfers – this section appears to have been closely rewritten, wherein it was added that the Sheriff can transfer employees from one position to another within and between classes of positions. What is interesting, as you refer to the exhibit A provided by Commissioner Jay, is that “as determined by the Sheriff” was added and “only under rules established by the merit system council” –
    These two items alone should be alarming to any of you that wish to keep qualified, dedicated deputies employed to protect your constituents. What is being proposed is a total removal of protections of employees from political retaliation, as well as unstable leadership. We have seen in communities around us, Oak Ridge for example, what a leader can do to people’s lives that only signed up to work and protect the community. If you all do not thing more should be added to ensure that in 80 years someone cannot come in and move people, without cause, from positions which they have been trained in (which, mind you, costs taxpayer dollars) please feel free to be transparent so that those that can make changes in their lives can do so.

    in reply to: June Non-consent #2043
    Terry Hill
    Participant

    Please pull items #48 and #49 from consent
    Terry

    in reply to: May Non-consent #1922
    Terry Hill
    Participant

    Got it…. Thanks!

    in reply to: Legislative Priorities #1715
    Terry Hill
    Participant

    Thanks for this listing. I am wondering on #4 what type of “protections” you were thinking about?

    in reply to: December Non-consent Items #1669
    Terry Hill
    Participant

    I would like the add from parks and rec on naming facilities to be pulled from consent.
    Terry

    in reply to: Judicial Appointment #1644
    Terry Hill
    Participant

    Yes that works

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 20 total)