Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem D-2H: Police Auditor Selection Process \ 2H.doc-S060522D\M060522\Agendas Council 2006 ECC UGENE ITY OUNCIL AIS GENDA TEM UMMARY Approval of Police Auditor Recruitment and Selection Process Meeting Date: May 22, 2006 Agenda Item Number: D-2H Department: Human Resource and Risk Services Staff Contact: Helen Towle www.eugene-or.gov Contact Telephone Number: 682-5110 ISSUE STATEMENT This is an action item to review and approve the recruitment and selection process for the Police Auditor, as proposed by the City Council ad hoc committee. Action on this item was originally scheduled for May 8, 2006. BACKGROUND On November 8, 2005, the voters of Eugene approved an amendment to the City Charter which created the authority for the City Council to hire a Police Auditor and create a civilian review board. At the work session on January 18, 2006, the City Council voted to create an ad hoc committee to make recommendations on the position description, compensation, and recruitment and selection process for the Police Auditor. The members of the ad hoc committee are Mayor Piercy, City Council President Solomon, City Council Vice-President Ortiz, and Police Commission Chair Tim Laue. On March 13, 2006, the position description and compensation package for the Police Auditor position were adopted by the council and funds allocated for the recruitment. The position was posted on March 27, 2006, and closed on April 28, 2006. A draft outline of a recommended recruitment and selection process was shared with the council as part of the March 13, 2006, work session. Councilor feedback on the selection process was provided to the ad hoc committee and was reflected in the proposal developed for the May 8 meeting. The ad hoc committee met again on May 10 and made several additional clarifications to the proposal, which are included in a revised Attachment A. The ad hoc committee also reviewed a screening guide which can be used by the council to evaluate the applications and select top candidates to proceed further in the process. The screening guide is included as Attachment B. RELATED CITY POLICIES This consent item does not directly address any City policies. It is an opportunity for the council to review the selection process recommended by the ad hoc committee and approve it so the hiring process for the Police Auditor may continue. COUNCIL OPTIONS The City Council is asked to approve the City Council ad hoc committee-recommended Police Auditor selection process so that the screening of the applications and the planning and preparation for the other L:\CMO\2006 Council Agendas\M060522\S060522D-2H.doc L:\CMO \ 2H.doc-S060522D\M060522\Agendas Council 2006 components of the selection process may begin. Please see Attachment A for the updated, detailed outline of the recruitment and selection process. Also included is an application screening guide that can be used to assist in screening applications and selecting those candidates to continue in the process (see Attachment B). City Council approval of the guide is requested at this meeting. The ad hoc committee has been continuing to work on other steps in the selection process, including contacting outside experts for input on screening criteria and interview questions and scheduling an expert to work with the council as the selection process continues; identifying community members and internal representatives for the interview process, and identifying potential dates for the interview process. The City Council can modify the recommended process and approve it at this time. As an alternative, the council may give further feedback to the ad hoc committee and ask it to reconsider the process and bring it back to the council for approval at a later date. CITY MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION The City Manager recommends that the council approve the recruitment and selection process proposed by the City Council ad hoc committee, as reflected in Attachment A, and the screening guide, as reflected in Attachment B. SUGGESTED MOTION Move to approve the recruitment and selection process for the Police Auditor outlined in Attachment A and the screening guide, reflected in Attachment B. ATTACHMENTS A.Police Auditor Recruitment and Selection Process Proposal B.Police Auditor Application Screening Guide FOR MORE INFORMATION Staff Contact: Helen Towle Telephone: 682-5110 Staff E-Mail: helen.k.towle@ci.eugene.or.us L:\CMO\2006 Council Agendas\M060522\S060522D-2H.doc L:\CMO ATTACHMENT A POLICE AUDITOR SELECTION PROCESS PROPOSAL Updated May 11, 2006 thth The position was posted on March 27 and closed April 28. The City Council Ad Hoc Committee on Police Auditor Recruitment and Selection recommends the following selection process components. 1.Develop and Finalize Selection Process a.The City Council ad hoc committee will draft selection process components for City Council review, and will finalize a recommendation for the selection process and forward it to the City Council for approval. 2.Review and Screen Applications. (Note – Applications will be considered confidential at this stage of the process.) a.The ad hoc committee will screen applications to identify those that meet the minimum qualifications in the job description. Any City Councilor who chooses to may individually review all applications screened out for not meeting minimums. b.The ad hoc committee will propose a screening guide for the City Council to use in screening the qualified candidates and select those that will go on to the next phase of the process. Several outside experts will be contacted for their advice on screening methodologies and criteria to rate applicants. c.The City Council will finalize the screening methodology and then individually evaluate the applications of all applicants that meet minimum qualifications. d.The City Council will meet in executive session to discuss the results of the screening process and make a decision for the finalists to proceed to the next phase of the process. e.An outside expert will be brought into the executive session to work with the City Council on selecting finalists. 3. Telephone Interviews (Note – This step may be waived if the Council decides it is not needed based on the number of top candidates.) a.All Councilors will be invited to submit one interview question for the process. The questions will then be reviewed and finalized by the ad hoc committee. (An outside expert may assist by helping develop interview questions or by participating in the process). b.The ad hoc committee will conduct telephone interviews with top applicants to select finalists for the on-site interview process. Other interested City Councilors can attend the interview process and evaluate candidates. c.The ad hoc committee will outline the strengths and weaknesses of each candidate based on the evaluations submitted. This information will then be provided to the City Council, who will select the finalists for on-site interviews. 4.Initial reference checking (optional) a.Human Resources and/or the ad hoc committee members will complete reference calls on top applicants and compile feedback for review by the committee and City Council. ATTACHMENT A 5.Preparation for Interview/Selection Process a.Each Councilor and the Mayor will submit one or two questions for the interview process. Questions will also be requested from outside experts. Additionally, other participants may be requested to submit questions. b.The ad hoc committee will review and finalize questions for the interviews. c.The ad hoc committee will develop a list of community members to participate in the selection process. This proposed list will be forwarded to the City Council for possible revisions/additions. Based on this feedback, the ad hoc committee will select persons to invite to participate in the community group. 6.Selection Process: Input to City Council a.Community and internal staff panels will be formed to meet with/interview finalists and provide input to the Council regarding those exercises prior to the City Council interview process. b.The internal panel (i.e. representatives from EPD – supervisors/managers and union representatives, City Manager’s Office/Human Rights staff, Human Resources staff, District Attorney’s Office representative) will interview the finalists and provide feedback to Council for their consideration. An outside expert(s) will also be part of the internal panel. c.The selected community members will meet with each finalist. The candidate will be asked to give a brief presentation (oral resume) followed by a moderated question/answer session. Participants will be asked to complete a feedback form, which will be forwarded to City Council for their review prior to making a decision on the finalist. This community forum could consist of 20-25 selected community members. As an alternative to this community forum/evaluation process, there could be an interview panel of made up of community members. (Note – 10 to 12 people is the maximum staff would recommend for an interview panel.) 7.Selection of Finalist(s) a.The City Council will conduct interviews of all finalists, review feedback from the internal and community panels, and identify its top candidate(s). The outside expert that participated in the internal panel could be invited to provide additional input to the Council during their deliberations to select the top candidate. 8.Options for Background Investigation & Reference Checking a.An outside background investigator will be hired, mostly likely from a recruiting or investigation firm, to complete the investigation. b.The background investigator will be provided with feedback or questions by the Council based on input they receive from the internal and community participants and their own observations. The outside expert from the interview process will be asked to provided input and guidance to the background investigator. c.The ad hoc committee will discuss and make a recommendation to the City Council regarding the participation of other City Councilors in the background process. d.A complete report of the results of the background investigation would be provided to the City Council for review and subsequent hiring decision. ATTACHMENT B POLICE AUDITOR Application Screening Guide May, 2006 Minimum Experience – Bachelor’s Degree in a relevant field and 5 years of progressively responsible relevant experience overseeing and performing administrative investigations, and performing program development, analysis, and complex professional support, preferably in the public sector Education 5- Master’s Degree in a related field or Juris Doctorate from an accredited university. 3- Bachelor’s degree in a directly related field from an accredited university. 1- Bachelor’s degree in a less related field from an accredited university. Note – The following criteria is provided to assist you in evaluating applications and selecting top candidates to move on in the process. In evaluating experience, consider both the length of time an applicant has worked in a directly related area and the degree of relevance of the experience to the requirements of the position. Overseeing/Performing Administrative Investigations 5- Extensive experience overseeing and performing administrative investigations, including supervising and performing complex investigations of employee’s conduct. 3- Moderate experience overseeing and performing administrative and employee investigations. 1- Minimal experience overseeing and performing administrative investigations in either a public or private sector environment. Program Development & Analysis 5- Extensive experience with public administration, police, or human resources programs establishing program priorities and procedures and measuring and reporting results, including researching and analyzing complex issues and recommending courses of action. 3- Moderate experience establishing program priorities and procedures and measuring and reporting results, researching and analyzing complex issues, and recommending courses of action. 1- Minimal experience establishing program priorities and procedures and measuring results. Complex Professional Staff Support 5- Extensive experience providing complex professional staff support to a Board or Commission (e.g. Civilian Review Board/Police Commission), or elected body (e.g., City Council, County Commission. Position involved delivering reports, providing recommendations on sensitive issues impacting multiple stakeholders, policy development and analysis, and training board or commission members on the program area when needed. 3- Moderate experience providing complex professional staff support to a Board or Commission or elected body. 1- Minimal experience providing complex professional staff support to a Board or Commission. Overseeing a Complaint or Intake Process 5- Extensive experience designing, implementing, and evaluating a process for receiving sensitive complaints from a broad, diverse group of people. 3- Moderate experience implementing and evaluating a complaint or intake process. 1- Experience working in a system that does intake of complaints. Community Relations/Public Information 5- Extensive experience doing work that involves developing working relationships with a broad base of the community, public education and outreach to diverse populations, and developing programs that earn credibility and trust of multiple stakeholders. 3- Moderate experience working in programs dealing with sensitive community issues and/or broad base audiences. 1- Experience working in programs with community impact. Police Operations 5- Experience working in a police department in a wide variety of program areas. 3- Experience working in the law enforcement/criminal justice field, which would afford the candidate significant knowledge or police operations. 1- Knowledge of police operations. Supervision 5- Significant experience supervising employees, including hiring, performance development, grievance response – in a public sector and/or unionized environment. 3- Moderate experience supervising employees, including all aspects of supervision – in a similar environment. 1- Minimum experience supervising employees Additional consideration - Fluency in Spanish Recommendation – after screening all applicants Councilors will be asked to identify which candidates they recommend to go on in the process and which they do not.