Skip to content Skip to left sidebar Skip to footer

Terry Hill

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 12 posts - 16 through 27 (of 27 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • 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

                  in reply to: Non-Consent Items October 2021 Work Session #1601
                  Terry Hill
                  Participant

                    thank you

                    in reply to: Redistricting Ordinance #1591
                    Terry Hill
                    Participant

                      Yes

                      Terry Hill
                      Participant

                        Got it, Thanks

                        Terry Hill
                        Participant

                          Got it!

                          Terry Hill
                          Participant

                            Item 45 – is anything going to be said about this given the countless hours it cost Dwight and the citizens that took time to apply and serve?

                          Viewing 12 posts - 16 through 27 (of 27 total)