Lincoln aldermen plan to eliminate city’s Civil Service Commission

 

[January 21, 2022] 

At the Tuesday night voting session of the Lincoln City Council aldermen voted unanimously to move forward with the first steps needed to eliminate the city’s Civil Service Commission.

The topic of the Civil Service Commission has come before the council in the past, but to date, this is the first official action taken to begin the process. Aldermen had asked that City Attorney John Hoblit look into what would be required. At the January 11th Committee of the Whole Hoblit outlined the process.

Hoblit advised the council that the process would not be as simple as passing a motion to dissolve the commission. There would be a step by step process that involved signatures of local voters, a ruling by a judge of the courts, and finally a referendum placed on a municipal voting ballot.

Hoblit said research he had done indicated that the city would need to collect signatures from one eighth of the voters who participated in the last municipal election. He said based on data he had before him there were approximately 580 Lincoln residents who voted in the last municipal election. One eighth of those voters would total 73. He said rounding it out he would recommend that the city collect 75 signatures.

Hoblit noted that this would be 75 signatures of people who actually voted, not signatures of registered voters.

The council talked about how that would be achieved. They were told that the council would need to seek a list of actual voters from County Clerk Theresa Moore. Then, the alderman would need to contact each one of those voters individually and ask them if they would sign the petition.

Once the signatures were in hand, the city would need to go before a judge and ask that he or she rule in favor of placing a referendum on the ballot to abolish the commission.

At that point the decision would be in the hands of the voters and the city would have to bow to that decision.

Hoblit said that he would encourage the council to establish an alternate hiring plan that still included some type of testing and a qualified hiring list. He said it would also be advisable to maintain addition points for veterans.
 

Kevin Bateman noted that the reason this is an issue is because of the hiring list. When the city has a Civil Service Commission, civil service testing is done for qualified applicants. The commission compiles the list of potential new hires, ranking them according to their civil service test scores.

When an opening becomes available, the city must then offer the job to the first person on the list. If that applicant is not available then the job is offered to the second person and so on and so forth down the line until the position is filled.

Bateman said talking with Street Superintendent Walt Landers the issue that came to light is that of the person with the best qualifications or experience is not always the one who gets the job. Bateman said that the opening may be for a position that requires a special skill, but regardless of whether or not the first person has that skill, he or she must be offered the job. Meanwhile, someone further down the list who does have the extra knowledge or experience needed, doesn’t get the opportunity.

Rick Hoefle said that if the city does away with the commission, it will need to be very careful in the future hiring process not to have it appear that they are showing favoritism in their hiring.

He asked Hoblit what the proper next action would be from the city.

Hoblit said that this particular subject had an odd twist. The city could vote on a motion to support abolition of the commission, and if that motion fails, the citizens of the city can take it up on their own. Someone not involved with city governance can go through the proper process and seek to have a question placed on the ballot. At that time, neither the city nor the city attorney would have any input on how the referendum is written or any control over the outcome.

For Hoefle’s question, Hoblit said the next step for the city would be to pass a motion saying it supported moving forward with the steps to abolish the Civil Service Commission.
 

Steve Parrott asked how the city would conduct a search for signatures. Would each alderman be responsible for reaching out to the voters personally? Hoefle said that the process might be conducted via a special committee. He thought a committee could streamline the process and make it easier for everyone. Hoblit said he thought that was a good idea.

Welch then verified the motion before the council would be to form a committee for collecting the necessary signatures. He also verified again that the signatures had to be from voters who actually voted in the last municipal election. Hoblit said yes that is how he reads the rules. He said he would research it further, but at this point he feels this is the step that must be taken.

Parrott asked how the signatures would be verified once collected and Bateman thought that authenticating the signatures would be the responsibility of the County Clerk.

Hoblit said that with the signatures in hand, the city would ask for a hearing date. When the hearing is set, there would be included a notice that the public could contest the signatures. Anyone who wished to do so would have to file a request to contest with the courts and would appear during the hearing. The judge would then make the final decisions.

At the January 18th voting session the motion read, “Resolution supporting and creating a Committee to gather signatures to Petition the Court to put the matter of the abolition of the Civil Service on the upcoming ballot.”

The motion to approve was made by Wanda Lee Rohlfs with Sam Downs offering the second.

Hoblit said that he had continued researching the voter requirement for the collection of signatures. Research he had done and others he had spoken to on the topic agreed that the proper process was to collect signatures from voters who actually voted in the last municipal election.

Hoblit said he felt the rule was a little mottled and vague and he was still looking into it because he felt the restriction was out of the ordinary.

There was no further discussion on the topic Tuesday evening and aldermen approved the motion by unanimous vote.

[Nila Smith]