Personnel Board - Special Meeting

All right, this is the town mechanis personnel board for September 16th, 2025. A special meeting at 5:00 pm. In attendance, we have John Schwin, Chief Hawk, me, Matt Shipley, Eric Fischer, Steve Corbal, Rita Martin, Brian Schneider, Amy Wespan, and June Nevich. Is that Drenovich? Thank you. Um, so open this. Uh, there's anybody here from the public? There is not. All right. So, new business to uh reertification of eligibility list to turn it over to John, town manager. No,

I don't know why these microphones aren't on. I'll just speak loudly so that it'll be recorded uh with new technology over here that come into place. As happens occasionally, we did certify the eligibility list at our last personnel board meeting after background checks began. We did find two items of note uh which we need to address and that's why we're here today to reertify in this list. So I'll address first uh it was the candidate formerly ranked as number one identified by the last board number 6500. That candidate had uh requested veterans preference points or actually I should say that we had identified him as a veteran based on the initial review. However, uh based on the requirements set forth by the state uh for the veterans preference points, um he did not complete a military contract or 180 plus day deployment. Uh so he was honorably discharged on the DB214. He did not falsify any information. However, those requirements were not met. Therefore, those 10 points that we had had added to him uh we took away in the new scoring. So, you will see that that candidate formerly ranked as number one now will be ranked as number two identified as driver's license number 650. That created a new candidate number one uh driver's license 5077. Issue number two which we needed to address was during the course of background investigation on candidate who was ranked number three identified as license 2278. Uh unfortunately we found that that candidate falsified information on his

application. Uh the question was asked if there had been any disciplinary action taken any suspensions disciplinary action warnings etc. candidate indicated no and unfortunately during this background investigation we found that that was not truthful. Therefore, he is disqualified or should be disqualified upon your certification from the list. That would remove him in totality from the list and therefore you'll see uh as presented by Gabbach the list as of 99 2025 only has six candidates as opposed to the seven who were originally listed. uh that set of six has had background checks completed down to number four which would be adequate for the hiring process. Uh assuming you know that any of those candidates choose not to take the job uh we would you know conduct a background investigation on the final two. If we found any issues there then we would have to obviously recruit but this as of the uh list as of 99205 is accurate and correct. be happy to answer any questions you have.

And before we begin, I could let the record show that Joe Wall entered ended the meeting. Are there any questions? Yeah, I just have one. We talked a little bit off the record, but I guess now that we're taking minutes, I just want to clarify the issue with the veterans preference points for candidate 6500. Okay. Um, the question that was asked on the questionnaire, did that ask him if he's eligible for the veterans preference points or did it just say, "Have you served in the military?" I don't have that directly in front of me. I have a question. That's a very good question. Okay. Do you know that, Chief?

I don't off hand, but we could probably grab it. I I I got the impression from talking earlier that it was because of like a the state law has certain qualifications, but I I'd be interested to find out how the question was worded to see if he had an affirmative duty to check the regulations before answering or if it's just a you know, you honorably discharge from the military type question. From what I recall, there were no questions regarding that. It was more of they they submitted a resume or their background and experiences. We didn't directly ask them are you eligible for veterans points but it that may have changed.

Yeah. I the the question is not asked on the application are you eligible for the points. The question is have you served? If yes provide your DD214 which he did. Okay. So we find that out you know automatically your brain says oh DD214 you get the veterans points. That's not the case. has to be, you know, like I said, either that 180day plus deployment or completed contract. So that question is not specified. So it sounds like maybe in the future maybe if we could alter our questions to maybe ask have you serve deployed overseas or something so that we could find out

or or prior to showing you a ranking and us putting that veterans points back, we should complete that a little bit more. I don't have any other questions. Any other questions? Well, can I get a motion to uh to approve the list then? I'll make a motion to uh approve the revised list as of 99205. Second. All in favor say I.

I. All oppose. Nay. Motion carries. I assume there's still no more general public there. There is not. Okay. Anything else that anybody else want to cover while we're here real quick? Are we ready to hire these people? Yes. I'd like to think we're getting dangerously close to making additional offers. Okay. Very well stated. covered your So, a motion to adjurnn then. I'll make a motion to adjurnn. Second. Second.

All in favor? Opposed? All right, we're adjourned.